Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 vs GLM 4.6
GLM 4.6 costs 4.5x less per output token than Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 ($2.20 vs $10.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 5 benchmarks have a result for both.
Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 or GLM 4.6: which to pick
Only GLM 4.6 has a coding score, 8.8 on the Vibe Coding Index; Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Pick Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 for a larger context window (1.05M against 205K tokens) and work measured by LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) or GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run), where it leads.
- Shared results
- 5
- Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 only
- 10
- GLM 4.6 only
- 64
- Like-for-like categories
- 3 of 9
Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.
Which one for your work
Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Only GLM 4.6 has a coding score, so no call is made.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
No call
Only GLM 4.6 has a AA Intelligence Index result, 18.5.
Directional only
Reasoning
GPQA Diamond
No call
Only GLM 4.6 has a GPQA Diamond result, 74.5%.
Directional only
Math
AIME
No call
Only GLM 4.6 has a AIME result, 92.7%.
Directional only
Knowledge
MMLU Pro
No call
Only GLM 4.6 has a MMLU Pro result, 82.2%.
Directional only
Web design
Design Arena: websites
No call
Only GLM 4.6 has a Design Arena: websites result, 1174.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05
Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 takes 1.05M tokens against 205K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
GLM 4.6
Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 $0.0063, GLM 4.6 $0.0017 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 not benchmarked, GLM 4.6 8.8 from 2 benchmarks.
- Widest category
- Reasoning, 5.5 points apart on average over 2 shared benchmarks.
- Widest single gap
- LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run): Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 77.8% against GLM 4.6 69.5%, 8.3 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 $10.00 against GLM 4.6 $2.20 per million output tokens, 4.5x apart.
- Context window
- Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 takes 1.05M tokens, GLM 4.6 205K.
Benchmark by benchmark
First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.
| Category | Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 | Bars | GLM 4.6 | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 1 | 1 | ||
| Reasoning | 2 | 0 | ||
| Knowledge | 1 | 0 | ||
| All shared boards | 4 | 1 |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index11
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 | GLM 4.6 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aider polyglot | 83.1% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 measured |
| SWE-bench Verified | Not measured | 68.2% | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| LMArena WebDev | Not measured | 1341 | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| AA Coding Index | Not measured | 45.8 | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) | 79.2% | 81.0% | GLM 4.6 |
| Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 3.1% | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) | 77.8% | 69.5% | Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 28.8% | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| Terminal-Bench | Not measured | 24.5% | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| GSO-Bench | 3.9% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 measured |
| ALE-Bench | Not measured | 340.8 | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| LMArena Text: coding | Not measured | 1449 | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| LMArena Text: software and IT | Not measured | 1455 | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| LMArena WebDev: HTML | Not measured | 1350 | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| SciCode | 7.7% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 24 boards here | |||
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 | GLM 4.6 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | Not measured | 18.5 | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here | |||
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 | GLM 4.6 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: agents building full-stack apps | Not measured | 1029 | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| Design Arena: agents building mobile apps | Not measured | 1096 | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| Design Arena: agents building Android apps | Not measured | 1084 | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| Design Arena: agents building Godot games | Not measured | 1180 | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| τ²-Bench Telecom | Not measured | 76.9% | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| METR time horizons | 55.4% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 measured |
| Remote Labor Index | 0.8% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 measured |
| DeepResearch Bench | 42.8% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 measured |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL) | Not measured | 72.4% | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| BrowseComp-Plus | Not measured | 48.2% | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 31 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 | GLM 4.6 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | Not measured | 74.5% | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 83.6% | 78.0% | Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 19.9% | 14.5% | Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | 84.8% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 measured |
| SimpleBench | 62.4% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 measured |
| VPCT | 46.4% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts | Not measured | 1440 | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| LMArena Text: expert | Not measured | 1432 | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts in English | Not measured | 1445 | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | Not measured | 45.7% | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here | |||
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 | GLM 4.6 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AIME | Not measured | 92.7% | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| MGSM (Vals AI) | Not measured | 89.8% | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| AA Math Index | Not measured | 86.0 | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 86.0% | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| LMArena Text: math | Not measured | 1432 | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| LMArena Text: mathematical work | Not measured | 1447 | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here | |||
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 | GLM 4.6 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro | Not measured | 82.2% | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| LegalBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 79.6% | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| CorpFin (Vals AI) | Not measured | 56.8% | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| TaxEval (Vals AI) | Not measured | 66.2% | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| MedQA (Vals AI) | Not measured | 92.2% | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run) | 85.8% | 82.9% | Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 |
| LMArena Text: science | Not measured | 1456 | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare | Not measured | 1455 | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| LMArena Text: legal and government | Not measured | 1448 | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| LMArena Text: business and finance | Not measured | 1416 | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here | |||
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 | GLM 4.6 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: websites | Not measured | 1174 | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| Design Arena: UI components | Not measured | 1145 | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| Design Arena: game dev | Not measured | 1150 | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| Design Arena: data viz | Not measured | 1161 | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| Design Arena: 3D | Not measured | 1128 | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| Design Arena: all code categories | Not measured | 1165 | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| Design Arena: SVG | Not measured | 1108 | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 2 boards here | |||
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 | GLM 4.6 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| IFBench | Not measured | 43.4% | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | Not measured | 54.0% | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 91.7% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 measured |
| LMArena Text | Not measured | 1440 | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| LMArena Text: instruction following | Not measured | 1410 | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| LMArena Text: creative writing | Not measured | 1412 | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| LMArena Text: English | Not measured | 1449 | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| LMArena Text: non-English | Not measured | 1426 | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| LMArena Text: Chinese | Not measured | 1499 | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| LMArena Text: German | Not measured | 1447 | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| LMArena Text: Japanese | Not measured | 1393 | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| LMArena Text: Korean | Not measured | 1400 | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| LMArena Text: French | Not measured | 1459 | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| LMArena Text: Spanish | Not measured | 1436 | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| LMArena Text: Russian | Not measured | 1418 | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| LMArena Text: Polish | Not measured | 1447 | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| LMArena Text: multi-turn | Not measured | 1427 | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| LMArena Text: longer queries | Not measured | 1422 | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| LMArena Text: writing and language | Not measured | 1415 | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| LMArena Text: entertainment and media | Not measured | 1409 | Only GLM 4.6 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 26 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 | GLM 4.6 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 5 boards here | |||
What each workload costs
Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.
Chat turn
1K input + 500 output tokens
GLM 4.6 costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
GLM 4.6 costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
GLM 4.6 costs less
Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.
Specification differences
The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.
| Specification | Google Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 | Z.ai GLM 4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Z.ai | |
| Weights | No public weights listed | Open weights |
| Released | June 5, 2025 | September 30, 2025 |
| Context window | 1.05M | 205K |
| Input $/Mtok | $1.25 | $0.60 |
| Output $/Mtok | $10.00 | $2.20 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | 8.8 |
| Independent measurements behind it | 0 | 2 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 better than GLM 4.6 for coding?
Only GLM 4.6 has a coding score, 8.8 on the Vibe Coding Index; Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 for a larger context window (1.05M against 205K tokens) and work measured by LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) or GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run), where it leads.
Which is cheaper, Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 or GLM 4.6?
Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 costs $1.25 per million input tokens and $10.00 per million output tokens; GLM 4.6 costs $0.60 and $2.20. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 or GLM 4.6?
Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05, with 1.05M tokens against 205K.
How many benchmarks is the Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 vs GLM 4.6 comparison based on?
5 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and GLM 4.6's on 2. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.