Compare · ModelsLive · 2 picked · head to head
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite vs GLM 5V Turbo
Side by side · benchmarks, pricing, and signals you can act on.
Winner summary
GLM 5V Turbo wins on 3/3 benchmarks
GLM 5V Turbo wins 3 of 3 shared benchmarks. Leads in speed.
Category leads
speed·GLM 5V Turbo
Hype vs Reality
Attention vs performance
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
#169 by perf·#6 by attention
GLM 5V Turbo
#133 by perf·#3 by attention
Best value
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
2.7x better value than GLM 5V Turbo
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
50.9 pts/$
$0.88/M
GLM 5V Turbo
19.1 pts/$
$2.60/M
Vendor risk
Who is behind the model
Google DeepMind
$4.27T·Tier 1
z-ai
private · undisclosed
Head to head
3 benchmarks · 2 models
Gemini 3.1 Flash LiteGLM 5V Turbo
Artificial Analysis · Agentic Index
GLM 5V Turbo leads by +54.9
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 3.1 Flash Lite
6.2
GLM 5V Turbo
61.1
Artificial Analysis · Coding Index
GLM 5V Turbo leads by +1.5
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 3.1 Flash Lite
34.7
GLM 5V Turbo
36.2
Artificial Analysis · Quality Index
GLM 5V Turbo leads by +17.8
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
25.0
GLM 5V Turbo
42.9
Full benchmark table
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite | GLM 5V Turbo |
|---|---|---|
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?" | 6.2 | 61.1 |
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. | 34.7 | 36.2 |
Artificial Analysis · Quality Index | 25.0 | 42.9 |
Pricing · per 1M tokens · projected $/mo at 10M tokens
| Model | Input | Output | Context | Projected $/mo |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| $0.25 | $1.50 | 1.0M tokens (~524 books) | $5.63 | |
| $1.20 | $4.00 | 203K tokens (~101 books) | $19.00 |