Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Gemini 2.5 Pro vs GLM 4.5

Gemini 2.5 Pro leads GLM 4.5 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 16.1 to 12.8, and GLM 4.5 costs 4.5x less per output token ($2.20 vs $10.00 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 50 benchmarks have a result for both.

Replace Gemini 2.5 Pro Replace GLM 4.5
Gemini 2.5 ProGoogle
Coding
19.1
Overall
41.8
Output $/M
$10.00
43
GLM 4.5Z.ai
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$2.20
7
vs boards won of 50 shared

Gemini 2.5 Pro or GLM 4.5: which to pick

Only Gemini 2.5 Pro has a coding score, 19.1 on the Vibe Coding Index; GLM 4.5 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick GLM 4.5 for output tokens 4.5x cheaper ($2.20 vs $10.00 per million) and work measured by SWE-bench Verified or CorpFin (Vals AI), where it leads.

Model AGemini 2.5 ProGoogle19.1/1003 independent benchmarks$0.64 per solved taskModel BGLM 4.5Z.aiNot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved task
Shared results
50
Gemini 2.5 Pro only
40
GLM 4.5 only
11
Like-for-like categories
8 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.

At a glance

Coding index
Gemini 2.5 Pro 19.1 from 3 benchmarks, GLM 4.5 not benchmarked.
Widest category
Agentic work, 11.1 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR): Gemini 2.5 Pro 69.0% against GLM 4.5 52.7%, 16.3 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Gemini 2.5 Pro $10.00 against GLM 4.5 $2.20 per million output tokens, 4.5x apart.
Context window
Gemini 2.5 Pro takes 1.05M tokens, GLM 4.5 131K.

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.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryGemini 2.5 ProBarsGLM 4.5Ties
Coding51
Intelligence10
Agentic work10
Reasoning60
Math40
Knowledge51
Web design15
General200
All shared boards437
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index51
Coding benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Pro and GLM 4.5
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProGLM 4.5Leader
SWE-bench Verified53.6%64.2%GLM 4.5
LMArena WebDev1226Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
AA Coding Index33.3Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)Not measured67.5%Only GLM 4.5 measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)54.4%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)0.4%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)80.1%73.8%Gemini 2.5 Pro
SciCode46.3%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)26.5%22.0%Gemini 2.5 Pro
Terminal-Bench32.6%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
GSO-Bench3.9%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
WeirdML54.0%40.6%Gemini 2.5 Pro
ALE-BenchNot measured344.8Only GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: coding14521434Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: software and IT14591440Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena WebDev: HTML1235Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
LMArena WebDev: from an image1285Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
Neither model has a result on the other 22 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Pro and GLM 4.5
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProGLM 4.5Leader
AA Intelligence Index16.112.8Gemini 2.5 Pro
Epoch Capabilities Index145.1Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Agentic work benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Pro and GLM 4.5
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProGLM 4.5Leader
AA Agentic Index1.6Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
τ²-Bench Telecom54.1%43.0%Gemini 2.5 Pro
GDPval23.3%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
DeepResearch Bench41.5%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
Vending-Bench 2$574Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
BrowseComp-Plus29.5%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
Neither model has a result on the other 35 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index60
Reasoning benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Pro and GLM 4.5
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProGLM 4.5Leader
GPQA DiamondNot measured72.2%Only GLM 4.5 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)84.4%78.2%Gemini 2.5 Pro
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)22.5%13.0%Gemini 2.5 Pro
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)85.3%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
ARC-AGI41.0%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
ARC-AGI-24.9%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts14551429Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: expert14521433Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English14531429Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Vision: diagrams1274Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
LMArena Vision: homework1281Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
Kagi LLM Benchmark70.3%57.9%Gemini 2.5 Pro
Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index40
Math benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Pro and GLM 4.5
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProGLM 4.5Leader
AIMENot measured86.7%Only GLM 4.5 measured
MATH 500 (Vals AI)Not measured94.0%Only GLM 4.5 measured
MGSM (Vals AI)Not measured90.8%Only GLM 4.5 measured
AA Math Index87.773.7Gemini 2.5 Pro
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)87.7%73.7%Gemini 2.5 Pro
OTIS Mock AIME84.7%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 324.6%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
FrontierMath, tier 40.0%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
LMArena Text: math14501427Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: mathematical work14541430Gemini 2.5 Pro
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index51
Knowledge benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Pro and GLM 4.5
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProGLM 4.5Leader
MMLU ProNot measured81.2%Only GLM 4.5 measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)Not measured75.6%Only GLM 4.5 measured
CaseLaw (Vals AI)63.9%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)60.8%61.0%GLM 4.5
TaxEval (Vals AI)Not measured72.4%Only GLM 4.5 measured
MortgageTax (Vals AI)68.9%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
MedQA (Vals AI)Not measured90.0%Only GLM 4.5 measured
MedCode (Vals AI)50.6%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)86.2%83.5%Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: science14801444Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14761455Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: legal and government14801438Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: business and finance14391420Gemini 2.5 Pro
FACTS Benchmark Suite61.5%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
Neither model has a result on the other 4 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index15
Web design benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Pro and GLM 4.5
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProGLM 4.5Leader
Design Arena: websites11671170GLM 4.5
Design Arena: UI components11401144GLM 4.5
Design Arena: game dev11111145GLM 4.5
Design Arena: data viz12211159Gemini 2.5 Pro
Design Arena: 3D10811170GLM 4.5
Design Arena: all code categories11521165GLM 4.5
Design Arena: SVGNot measured1096Only GLM 4.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 2 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index200
General benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Pro and GLM 4.5
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProGLM 4.5Leader
SAGE (Vals AI)41.9%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)73.5%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
IFBench48.7%44.1%Gemini 2.5 Pro
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)69.0%52.7%Gemini 2.5 Pro
DTBench82.4%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
LMCA34.8%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
Creative writing (Lech Mazur)83.8%73.4%Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text14581430Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: instruction following14371404Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: creative writing14541395Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Vision1263Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
LMArena Text: English14581437Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: non-English14521417Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: Chinese15071465Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: German14871407Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: Japanese14611415Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: Korean14341380Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: French14731418Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: Spanish14741454Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: Russian14611413Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: Polish14791422Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: multi-turn14531415Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: longer queries14491412Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: writing and language14541403Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: entertainment and media14411404Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Vision: English1261Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
LMArena Vision: Chinese1300Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
LMArena Vision: reading text1270Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
LMArena Vision: humor1262Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
LMArena Vision: captioning1304Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
LMArena Vision: recognizing things1283Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
LMArena Vision: creative writing1265Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
LMArena Document1421Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Pro and GLM 4.5
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProGLM 4.5Leader
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

Gemini 2.5 Pro$0.0063Fits in one request
GLM 4.5$0.0017Fits in one request

GLM 4.5 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Gemini 2.5 Pro$0.092Fits in one request
GLM 4.5$0.037Fits in one request

GLM 4.5 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Gemini 2.5 Pro$0.350Fits in one request
GLM 4.5$0.142Exceeds the context window

GLM 4.5 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.

Specifications of Gemini 2.5 Pro and GLM 4.5
SpecificationGoogle Gemini 2.5 ProZ.ai GLM 4.5
MakerGoogleZ.ai
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedJune 17, 2025July 25, 2025
Context window1.05M131K
Input $/Mtok$1.25$0.60
Output $/Mtok$10.00$2.20
Coding index19.1Not benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it30
Cost per solved task$0.64Not computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Gemini 2.5 Pro better than GLM 4.5 for coding?

Only Gemini 2.5 Pro has a coding score, 19.1 on the Vibe Coding Index; GLM 4.5 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick GLM 4.5 for output tokens 4.5x cheaper ($2.20 vs $10.00 per million) and work measured by SWE-bench Verified or CorpFin (Vals AI), where it leads.

Which is cheaper, Gemini 2.5 Pro or GLM 4.5?

Gemini 2.5 Pro costs $1.25 per million input tokens and $10.00 per million output tokens; GLM 4.5 costs $0.60 and $2.20. Cost per solved task is known for Gemini 2.5 Pro only.

Which has the bigger context window, Gemini 2.5 Pro or GLM 4.5?

Gemini 2.5 Pro, with 1.05M tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks is the Gemini 2.5 Pro vs GLM 4.5 comparison based on?

50 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Gemini 2.5 Pro's coding index rests on 3 independent benchmarks and GLM 4.5's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next