Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Gemma 3 12B vs GLM 5.1

GLM 5.1 leads Gemma 3 12B on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 26.1 to 3.8, and Gemma 3 12B costs 27.1x less per output token ($0.1625 vs $4.40 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 35 benchmarks have a result for both.

Gemma 3 12BGoogle
Coding
No data
Overall
28.0
Output $/M
$0.1625
0
GLM 5.1Z.ai
Coding
49.2
Overall
57.5
Output $/M
$4.40
35
vs boards won of 35 shared

Gemma 3 12B or GLM 5.1: which to pick

Only GLM 5.1 has a coding score, 49.2 on the Vibe Coding Index; Gemma 3 12B has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Gemma 3 12B for output tokens 27.1x cheaper ($0.1625 vs $4.40 per million).

Shared results
35
Gemma 3 12B only
8
GLM 5.1 only
54
Like-for-like categories
7 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
Gemma 3 12B not benchmarked, GLM 5.1 49.2 from 3 benchmarks.
Widest category
Agentic work, 55.3 points apart on average over 2 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
τ²-Bench Telecom: Gemma 3 12B 10.8% against GLM 5.1 97.7%, 86.8 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Gemma 3 12B $0.1625 against GLM 5.1 $4.40 per million output tokens, 27.1x apart.
Context window
Gemma 3 12B takes 131K tokens, GLM 5.1 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.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryGemma 3 12BBarsGLM 5.1Ties
Coding05
Intelligence02
Agentic work02
Reasoning06
Math03
Knowledge04
General013
All shared boards035
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index05
Coding benchmarks for Gemma 3 12B and GLM 5.1
BenchmarkGemma 3 12BGLM 5.1Leader
LMArena WebDevNot measured1508Only GLM 5.1 measured
AA Coding Index5.855.8GLM 5.1
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)Not measured81.4%Only GLM 5.1 measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)Not measured76.4%Only GLM 5.1 measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)Not measured31.5%Only GLM 5.1 measured
Code migration (Vals AI)Not measured25.8%Only GLM 5.1 measured
ProgramBench (Vals AI)Not measured0.0%Only GLM 5.1 measured
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)Not measured56.9%Only GLM 5.1 measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)13.7%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
SciCode16.4%44.8%GLM 5.1
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)0.8%43.2%GLM 5.1
WeirdMLNot measured57.1%Only GLM 5.1 measured
ALE-BenchNot measured887.1Only GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: coding12811485GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: software and IT13131484GLM 5.1
LMArena WebDev: ReactNot measured1505Only GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena WebDev: HTMLNot measured1508Only GLM 5.1 measured
SciCode0.0%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 21 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Intelligence benchmarks for Gemma 3 12B and GLM 5.1
BenchmarkGemma 3 12BGLM 5.1Leader
AA Intelligence Index3.826.1GLM 5.1
Epoch Capabilities Index123.5149.8GLM 5.1
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Agentic work benchmarks for Gemma 3 12B and GLM 5.1
BenchmarkGemma 3 12BGLM 5.1Leader
AA Agentic Index0.123.9GLM 5.1
Design Arena: agents building web appsNot measured1175Only GLM 5.1 measured
Design Arena: agents building full-stack appsNot measured1167Only GLM 5.1 measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile appsNot measured1162Only GLM 5.1 measured
Design Arena: agents building Android appsNot measured1180Only GLM 5.1 measured
Design Arena: agents building Godot gamesNot measured1053Only GLM 5.1 measured
Design Arena: agents building gamesNot measured1164Only GLM 5.1 measured
Design Arena: HTML slidesNot measured1170Only GLM 5.1 measured
Design Arena: PowerPoint slidesNot measured1188Only GLM 5.1 measured
Design Arena: spreadsheetsNot measured1315Only GLM 5.1 measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)Not measured44.8%Only GLM 5.1 measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)Not measured27.9%Only GLM 5.1 measured
τ²-Bench Telecom10.8%97.7%GLM 5.1
APEX-AgentsNot measured40.9%Only GLM 5.1 measured
Vending-Bench 2Not measured$5,634Only GLM 5.1 measured
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL)30.4%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 25 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index06
Reasoning benchmarks for Gemma 3 12B and GLM 5.1
BenchmarkGemma 3 12BGLM 5.1Leader
GPQA DiamondNot measured84.5%Only GLM 5.1 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)34.9%86.8%GLM 5.1
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)4.2%30.1%GLM 5.1
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)39.5%89.9%GLM 5.1
SimpleBenchNot measured55.1%Only GLM 5.1 measured
Chess puzzlesNot measured20.0%Only GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts13091473GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: expert12481478GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English13181482GLM 5.1
Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index03
Math benchmarks for Gemma 3 12B and GLM 5.1
BenchmarkGemma 3 12BGLM 5.1Leader
AIMENot measured91.9%Only GLM 5.1 measured
AA Math Index18.3Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)18.3%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
OTIS Mock AIME16.7%93.3%GLM 5.1
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3Not measured36.8%Only GLM 5.1 measured
ProofBenchNot measured22.2%Only GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: math13071473GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: mathematical work13361470GLM 5.1
Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
Knowledge benchmarks for Gemma 3 12B and GLM 5.1
BenchmarkGemma 3 12BGLM 5.1Leader
MMLU ProNot measured86.9%Only GLM 5.1 measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)Not measured84.4%Only GLM 5.1 measured
CaseLaw (Vals AI)Not measured51.5%Only GLM 5.1 measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)Not measured64.5%Only GLM 5.1 measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)Not measured71.2%Only GLM 5.1 measured
MedCode (Vals AI)Not measured41.6%Only GLM 5.1 measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)59.5%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
SimpleQA VerifiedNot measured34.0%Only GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: science13661478GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare13341474GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: legal and government13811465GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: business and finance13761452GLM 5.1
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Gemma 3 12B and GLM 5.1
BenchmarkGemma 3 12BGLM 5.1Leader
Design Arena: websitesNot measured1290Only GLM 5.1 measured
Design Arena: UI componentsNot measured1292Only GLM 5.1 measured
Design Arena: game devNot measured1265Only GLM 5.1 measured
Design Arena: data vizNot measured1366Only GLM 5.1 measured
Design Arena: 3DNot measured1336Only GLM 5.1 measured
Design Arena: all code categoriesNot measured1268Only GLM 5.1 measured
Design Arena: SVGNot measured1218Only GLM 5.1 measured
Design Arena: ASCII artNot measured1142Only GLM 5.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index013
General benchmarks for Gemma 3 12B and GLM 5.1
BenchmarkGemma 3 12BGLM 5.1Leader
Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI)Not measured61.8%Only GLM 5.1 measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)Not measured72.3%Only GLM 5.1 measured
IFBench36.7%76.3%GLM 5.1
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)8.3%73.7%GLM 5.1
DTBench48.8%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
LMCA4.5%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
ExploitBenchNot measured18.1%Only GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text13341463GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: instruction following12991453GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: creative writing13311453GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: English13491476GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: non-English13181448GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: ChineseNot measured1515Only GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: German13701467GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: JapaneseNot measured1435Only GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: KoreanNot measured1424Only GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: FrenchNot measured1470Only GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: SpanishNot measured1468Only GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: Russian13351454GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: PolishNot measured1449Only GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn13341473GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: longer queries13171467GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: writing and language13071454GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: entertainment and media12971442GLM 5.1
Neither model has a result on the other 22 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Gemma 3 12B and GLM 5.1
BenchmarkGemma 3 12BGLM 5.1Leader
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

Gemma 3 12B$0.0002Fits in one request
GLM 5.1$0.0036Fits in one request

Gemma 3 12B costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Gemma 3 12B$0.0042Fits in one request
GLM 5.1$0.083Fits in one request

Gemma 3 12B costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Gemma 3 12B$0.017Exceeds the context window
GLM 5.1$0.324Exceeds the context window

Gemma 3 12B 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 Gemma 3 12B and GLM 5.1
SpecificationGoogle Gemma 3 12BZ.ai GLM 5.1
MakerGoogleZ.ai
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedMarch 13, 2025April 7, 2026
Context window131K205K
Input $/Mtok$0.075$1.40
Output $/Mtok$0.1625$4.40
Coding indexNot benchmarked49.2
Independent measurements behind it03
Cost per solved taskNot computable$0.60
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Gemma 3 12B better than GLM 5.1 for coding?

Only GLM 5.1 has a coding score, 49.2 on the Vibe Coding Index; Gemma 3 12B has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Gemma 3 12B for output tokens 27.1x cheaper ($0.1625 vs $4.40 per million).

Which is cheaper, Gemma 3 12B or GLM 5.1?

Gemma 3 12B costs $0.075 per million input tokens and $0.1625 per million output tokens; GLM 5.1 costs $1.40 and $4.40. Cost per solved task is known for GLM 5.1 only.

Which has the bigger context window, Gemma 3 12B or GLM 5.1?

GLM 5.1, with 205K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks is the Gemma 3 12B vs GLM 5.1 comparison based on?

35 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Gemma 3 12B's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and GLM 5.1's on 3. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next