Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Gemini 2.5 Pro vs GLM 4.7 Flash

Updated October 21, 2026. 42 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.

Replace Gemini 2.5 Pro Replace GLM 4.7 Flash
Gemini 2.5 ProGoogle
Coding
19.1
Overall
16.1
Output $/M
$10.00
35
GLM 4.7 FlashZ.ai
Coding
No data
Overall
14.9
Output $/M
$0.40
7
vs boards won of 42 shared

Decision reading

Only Gemini 2.5 Pro has a coding score, 19.1 on the Vibe Coding Index; GLM 4.7 Flash has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

GLM 4.7 Flash has the edge where output tokens cost 25.0x less, and where what matters is τ²-Bench Telecom or Design Arena: websites, where it leads.

Model AGemini 2.5 ProGoogle19.1/1003 independent benchmarks$0.64 per solved taskModel BGLM 4.7 FlashZ.aiNot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved task
Shared results
42
Gemini 2.5 Pro only
45
GLM 4.7 Flash only
1
Like-for-like categories
8 of 9

Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results only one model has describe coverage, not superiority.

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 4.7 Flash not benchmarked.
Widest category
Agentic work, 44.7 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
τ²-Bench Telecom: Gemini 2.5 Pro 54.1% against GLM 4.7 Flash 98.8%, 44.7 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Gemini 2.5 Pro $10.00 against GLM 4.7 Flash $0.40 per million output tokens, 25.0x apart.
Context window
Gemini 2.5 Pro takes 1.05M tokens, GLM 4.7 Flash 200K.

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 4.7 FlashTies
Coding30
Intelligence10
Agentic work01
Reasoning60
Math30
Knowledge40
Web design15
General171
All shared boards357
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index30
Coding benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Pro and GLM 4.7 Flash
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProGLM 4.7 FlashLeader
SWE-bench Verified53.6%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
LMArena WebDev1226Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
AA Coding Index33.3Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro 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%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
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%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
LMArena Text: coding14521382Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: software and IT14591389Gemini 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 23 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Pro and GLM 4.7 Flash
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProGLM 4.7 FlashLeader
AA Intelligence Index16.114.9Gemini 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 index01
Agentic work benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Pro and GLM 4.7 Flash
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProGLM 4.7 FlashLeader
AA Agentic Index1.6Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
τ²-Bench Telecom54.1%98.8%GLM 4.7 Flash
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
Neither model has a result on the other 34 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index60
Reasoning benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Pro and GLM 4.7 Flash
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProGLM 4.7 FlashLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)84.4%58.1%Gemini 2.5 Pro
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)22.5%7.6%Gemini 2.5 Pro
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)85.3%60.5%Gemini 2.5 Pro
ARC-AGI41.0%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
ARC-AGI-24.9%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts14551356Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: expert14521357Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English14531369Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Vision: diagrams1274Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
LMArena Vision: homework1281Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index30
Math benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Pro and GLM 4.7 Flash
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProGLM 4.7 FlashLeader
AA Math Index87.7Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)87.7%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
OTIS Mock AIME84.7%58.3%Gemini 2.5 Pro
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: math14501355Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: mathematical work14541369Gemini 2.5 Pro
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index40
Knowledge benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Pro and GLM 4.7 Flash
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProGLM 4.7 FlashLeader
CaseLaw (Vals AI)63.9%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)60.8%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
MortgageTax (Vals AI)68.9%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
MedCode (Vals AI)50.6%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)86.2%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
LMArena Text: science14801358Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14761343Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: legal and government14801357Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: business and finance14391343Gemini 2.5 Pro
Neither model has a result on the other 8 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 4.7 Flash
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProGLM 4.7 FlashLeader
Design Arena: websites11671194GLM 4.7 Flash
Design Arena: UI components11401208GLM 4.7 Flash
Design Arena: game dev11111135GLM 4.7 Flash
Design Arena: data viz12211123Gemini 2.5 Pro
Design Arena: 3D10801121GLM 4.7 Flash
Design Arena: all code categories11521178GLM 4.7 Flash
Design Arena: SVGNot measured1038Only GLM 4.7 Flash measured
Neither model has a result on the other 2 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index171
General benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Pro and GLM 4.7 Flash
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProGLM 4.7 FlashLeader
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%60.8%GLM 4.7 Flash
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)69.0%41.7%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%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
LMArena Text14581351Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: instruction following14371327Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: creative writing14541296Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Vision1263Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
LMArena Text: English14581373Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: non-English14521330Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: Chinese15071403Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: German14871336Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: Japanese1461Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro measured
LMArena Text: Korean14341283Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: French14731332Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: Spanish14741350Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: Russian14611333Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: Polish14791291Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: multi-turn14531342Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: longer queries14491345Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: writing and language14541320Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text: entertainment and media14411304Gemini 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 4.7 Flash
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProGLM 4.7 FlashLeader
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 4.7 Flash$0.0003Fits in one request

GLM 4.7 Flash costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Gemini 2.5 Pro$0.092Fits in one request
GLM 4.7 Flash$0.0045Fits in one request

GLM 4.7 Flash costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Gemini 2.5 Pro$0.350Fits in one request
GLM 4.7 Flash$0.017Exceeds the context window

GLM 4.7 Flash 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 4.7 Flash
SpecificationGoogle Gemini 2.5 ProZ.ai GLM 4.7 Flash
MakerGoogleZ.ai
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedJune 17, 2025January 19, 2026
Context window1.05M200K
Input $/Mtok$1.25$0.0653
Output $/Mtok$10.00$0.40
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 4.7 Flash for coding?

Only Gemini 2.5 Pro has a coding score, 19.1 on the Vibe Coding Index; GLM 4.7 Flash has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. GLM 4.7 Flash has the edge where output tokens cost 25.0x less, and where what matters is τ²-Bench Telecom or Design Arena: websites, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, Gemini 2.5 Pro or GLM 4.7 Flash?

Gemini 2.5 Pro costs $1.25 per million input tokens and $10.00 per million output tokens; GLM 4.7 Flash costs $0.0653 and $0.40. Cost per solved task is known for Gemini 2.5 Pro only.

Which has the bigger context window, Gemini 2.5 Pro or GLM 4.7 Flash?

Gemini 2.5 Pro, with 1.05M tokens against 200K.

How many benchmarks is the Gemini 2.5 Pro vs GLM 4.7 Flash comparison based on?

42 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 4.7 Flash's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next