Model Comparison
GLM-4.5 (Reasoning)
vs. Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
Comparing 2 AI models · 12 benchmarks · Z AI, Google
Recommended Pick
Go Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview 12 metric wins Strongest on: Throughput, Latency, Reasoning
Best Value
GLM-4.5 (Reasoning)
100.0 value score
64.2 reasoning / $1.00/1M
Lowest Price
GLM-4.5 (Reasoning)
$0.60/1M input price
Best Reasoning
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
65.3 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
55.5 coding index
Composite Indices
Higher is better; speed and price are normalized
Standard Benchmarks
Only benchmarks with data are shown
Differences That Matter
Best value
GLM-4.5 (Reasoning) has the strongest quality-to-price mix at 100.0 out of 100 value points.
Price gap
GLM-4.5 (Reasoning) is 3.3x cheaper on input tokens than Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview.
Speed gap
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview generates about 2.3x as many tokens per second as GLM-4.5 (Reasoning).
Reasoning gap
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads GLM-4.5 (Reasoning) by 1.1 points on reasoning.
Coding gap
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads GLM-4.5 (Reasoning) by 29.2 points on coding.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
GLM-4.5 (Reasoning)
Z AI
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Full Comparison
| Metric | Z GLM-4.5 (Reasoning) | Top Pick Go Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $0.60/1M | $2.00/1M |
| Output Cost | $2.20/1M | $12.00/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $1.00/1M | $4.50/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | Z AI | |
| Release Date | Jul 28, 2025 | Feb 19, 2026 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | 52.5 tok/s | 120.2 tok/s |
| TTFT | 1350ms | 23928ms |
| Latency | 39473ms | 23928ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 100.0 | 22.6 |
| Reasoning Score | 64.2 | 65.3 |
| Intelligence | 26.4 | 57.2 |
| Coding | 26.3 | 55.5 |
| Math | 73.7 | — |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 78.2% | 94.1% |
| MMLU Pro | 83.5% | — |
| HLE | 12.2% | 44.7% |
| LiveCodeBench | 73.8% | — |
| MATH 500 | 97.9% | — |
| AIME 2025 | 73.7% | — |
| AIME (Original) | 87.3% | — |
| SciCode | 34.8% | 58.9% |
| LCR | 48.3% | 72.7% |
| IFBench | 44.1% | 77.1% |
| TAU-bench v2 | 43.0% | 95.6% |
| TerminalBench Hard | 22.0% | 53.8% |
Key Takeaways
GLM-4.5 (Reasoning) offers the best value at $0.60/1M, making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview has the strongest reasoning profile with a 65.3 reasoning score, combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview reaches a 55.5 coding index, making it the top choice for software development and code generation tasks.
All models support context windows of ∞+ tokens, suitable for processing lengthy documents and maintaining extended conversations.
When to Choose Each Model
GLM-4.5 (Reasoning)
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
- Code generation
- Software development
