Compare · ModelsLive · 2 picked · head to head
Gemini 2.5 Pro vs GLM 5.2
Side by side · benchmarks, pricing, and signals you can act on.
Winner summary
GLM 5.2 wins on 17/19 benchmarks
GLM 5.2 wins 17 of 19 shared benchmarks. Leads in speed · agentic · reasoning.
Category leads
speed·GLM 5.2agentic·GLM 5.2reasoning·GLM 5.2arena·GLM 5.2knowledge·GLM 5.2general·GLM 5.2math·GLM 5.2coding·GLM 5.2
Hype vs Reality
Attention vs performance
Gemini 2.5 Pro
#125 by perf·no signal
GLM 5.2
#75 by perf·#3 by attention
Best value
GLM 5.2
1.8x better value than Gemini 2.5 Pro
Gemini 2.5 Pro
9.0 pts/$
$5.63/M
GLM 5.2
16.5 pts/$
$3.40/M
Vendor risk
Who is behind the model
Google DeepMind
$3.53T·Tier 1
z-ai
private · undisclosed
Head to head
19 benchmarks · 2 models
Gemini 2.5 ProGLM 5.2
Artificial Analysis · Agentic Index
GLM 5.2 leads by +10.4
Artificial Analysis Agentic Index · a composite score measuring how well a model performs in agentic workflows · multi-step tool use, planning, error recovery, and autonomous task completion. Aggregates results from multiple agentic benchmarks including SWE-bench, tool-use tests, and planning evaluations. The canonical single-number metric for "how good is this model as an agent?"
Gemini 2.5 Pro
32.7
GLM 5.2
43.1
Artificial Analysis · Coding Index
GLM 5.2 leads by +36.8
Artificial Analysis Coding Index · a composite score that aggregates performance across multiple coding benchmarks into a single index. Tracks code generation quality, debugging ability, multi-language competence, and real-world software engineering tasks. Used by Artificial Analysis to rank model coding capability in a normalized, comparable format. Useful for developers choosing between models for coding-heavy workloads.
Gemini 2.5 Pro
31.9
GLM 5.2
68.8
Artificial Analysis · Quality Index
GLM 5.2 leads by +24.1
Gemini 2.5 Pro
27.0
GLM 5.2
51.1
APEX-Agents
GLM 5.2 leads by +38.6
APEX-Agents · evaluates AI agents on complex, multi-step tasks requiring planning, tool use, and autonomous decision-making in realistic environments.
Gemini 2.5 Pro
6.6
GLM 5.2
45.2
ARC-AGI
GLM 5.2 leads by +36.0
ARC-AGI · the original Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus, testing whether AI can solve novel visual pattern recognition tasks without memorization.
Gemini 2.5 Pro
41.0
GLM 5.2
77.0
ARC-AGI-2
GLM 5.2 leads by +17.9
ARC-AGI-2 · the second iteration of the Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus, testing novel pattern recognition and abstract reasoning without prior training data.
Gemini 2.5 Pro
4.9
GLM 5.2
22.8
Chatbot Arena Elo · Coding
GLM 5.2 leads by +366.3
Gemini 2.5 Pro
1227.0
GLM 5.2
1593.3
Chatbot Arena Elo · Overall
GLM 5.2 leads by +25.4
Gemini 2.5 Pro
1445.6
GLM 5.2
1471.0
Chess Puzzles
GLM 5.2 leads by +2.1
Chess Puzzles · tests strategic and tactical reasoning by having models solve chess puzzle positions, evaluating lookahead and pattern recognition abilities.
Gemini 2.5 Pro
15.8
GLM 5.2
17.9
Dtbench
GLM 5.2 leads by +18.7
Gemini 2.5 Pro
70.7
GLM 5.2
89.3
FrontierMath-Tier-4-v2-Private
GLM 5.2 leads by +29.3
Gemini 2.5 Pro
0.0
GLM 5.2
29.3
FrontierMath-Tiers-1-3-v2-Private
GLM 5.2 leads by +36.5
Gemini 2.5 Pro
25.9
GLM 5.2
62.3
GPQA diamond
GLM 5.2 leads by +9.1
Graduate-Level Google-Proof QA (Diamond set) · expert-crafted questions in physics, biology, and chemistry that are difficult even for domain PhDs.
Gemini 2.5 Pro
83.7
GLM 5.2
92.9
Lmca
GLM 5.2 leads by +13.0
Gemini 2.5 Pro
40.9
GLM 5.2
53.9
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025
GLM 5.2 leads by +1.7
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 · simulated American Invitational Mathematics Examination problems testing advanced problem-solving skills.
Gemini 2.5 Pro
84.7
GLM 5.2
86.4
SimpleBench
Gemini 2.5 Pro leads by +4.3
SimpleBench · tests fundamental reasoning capabilities with straightforward problems designed to expose gaps in basic logical and spatial thinking.
Gemini 2.5 Pro
54.9
GLM 5.2
50.6
SimpleQA Verified
Gemini 2.5 Pro leads by +21.8
SimpleQA Verified · short factual questions with verified answers, measuring factual accuracy and the tendency to hallucinate or provide incorrect information.
Gemini 2.5 Pro
56.0
GLM 5.2
34.2
SWE-Bench verified
GLM 5.2 leads by +21.1
SWE-bench Verified · 500 human-validated tasks from 12 real Python repositories (Django, Flask, scikit-learn, sympy, and others). Each task requires the model to produce a git patch that resolves a real GitHub issue and passes the test suite. The verified subset eliminates ambiguous tasks from the original SWE-bench. The benchmark remains the most-cited evaluation for code-generation capability.
Gemini 2.5 Pro
57.6
GLM 5.2
78.7
WeirdML
GLM 5.2 leads by +16.1
WeirdML · tests models on unusual and adversarial machine learning tasks that require creative problem-solving beyond standard patterns.
Gemini 2.5 Pro
54.0
GLM 5.2
70.1
Full benchmark table
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | GLM 5.2 |
|---|---|---|
Artificial Analysis · Agentic Index Artificial Analysis Agentic Index · a composite score measuring how well a model performs in agentic workflows · multi-step tool use, planning, error recovery, and autonomous task completion. Aggregates results from multiple agentic benchmarks including SWE-bench, tool-use tests, and planning evaluations. The canonical single-number metric for "how good is this model as an agent?" | 32.7 | 43.1 |
Artificial Analysis · Coding Index Artificial Analysis Coding Index · a composite score that aggregates performance across multiple coding benchmarks into a single index. Tracks code generation quality, debugging ability, multi-language competence, and real-world software engineering tasks. Used by Artificial Analysis to rank model coding capability in a normalized, comparable format. Useful for developers choosing between models for coding-heavy workloads. | 31.9 | 68.8 |
Artificial Analysis · Quality Index | 27.0 | 51.1 |
APEX-Agents APEX-Agents · evaluates AI agents on complex, multi-step tasks requiring planning, tool use, and autonomous decision-making in realistic environments. | 6.6 | 45.2 |
ARC-AGI ARC-AGI · the original Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus, testing whether AI can solve novel visual pattern recognition tasks without memorization. | 41.0 | 77.0 |
ARC-AGI-2 ARC-AGI-2 · the second iteration of the Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus, testing novel pattern recognition and abstract reasoning without prior training data. | 4.9 | 22.8 |
Chatbot Arena Elo · Coding | 1227.0 | 1593.3 |
Chatbot Arena Elo · Overall | 1445.6 | 1471.0 |
Chess Puzzles Chess Puzzles · tests strategic and tactical reasoning by having models solve chess puzzle positions, evaluating lookahead and pattern recognition abilities. | 15.8 | 17.9 |
Dtbench | 70.7 | 89.3 |
FrontierMath-Tier-4-v2-Private | 0.0 | 29.3 |
FrontierMath-Tiers-1-3-v2-Private | 25.9 | 62.3 |
GPQA diamond Graduate-Level Google-Proof QA (Diamond set) · expert-crafted questions in physics, biology, and chemistry that are difficult even for domain PhDs. | 83.7 | 92.9 |
Lmca | 40.9 | 53.9 |
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 · simulated American Invitational Mathematics Examination problems testing advanced problem-solving skills. | 84.7 | 86.4 |
SimpleBench SimpleBench · tests fundamental reasoning capabilities with straightforward problems designed to expose gaps in basic logical and spatial thinking. | 54.9 | 50.6 |
SimpleQA Verified SimpleQA Verified · short factual questions with verified answers, measuring factual accuracy and the tendency to hallucinate or provide incorrect information. | 56.0 | 34.2 |
SWE-Bench verified SWE-bench Verified · 500 human-validated tasks from 12 real Python repositories (Django, Flask, scikit-learn, sympy, and others). Each task requires the model to produce a git patch that resolves a real GitHub issue and passes the test suite. The verified subset eliminates ambiguous tasks from the original SWE-bench. The benchmark remains the most-cited evaluation for code-generation capability. | 57.6 | 78.7 |
WeirdML WeirdML · tests models on unusual and adversarial machine learning tasks that require creative problem-solving beyond standard patterns. | 54.0 | 70.1 |
Pricing · per 1M tokens · projected $/mo at 10M tokens
| Model | Input | Output | Context | Projected $/mo |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| $1.25 | $10.00 | 1.0M tokens (~524 books) | $34.38 | |
| $0.01 | $6.80 | 1.0M tokens (~524 books) | $17.05 |