GLM-4.6V vs Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite comes out ahead, 85 to 59 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.
Z.ai (Zhipu)GLM-4.6V
59/100- ECI—
- Price$0.30 / $0.90
- Context128K
- Our pick
GoogleGemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
85/100- ECI133.9
- Price$0.10 / $0.40
- Context1.05M
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is our pick
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is the better all-round choice, scoring 85/100 against GLM-4.6V (59). It leads on price, inputs & features and context window. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
- CapabilityNot enough dataNo independent benchmark covers every model here yet
- Lowest priceGemini 2.5 Flash-LiteGemini 2.5 Flash-Lite $0.175 · GLM-4.6V $0.45 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextGemini 2.5 Flash-LiteGemini 2.5 Flash-Lite 1,048,576 · GLM-4.6V 128,000 tokens
- Widest inputsGemini 2.5 Flash-LiteGLM-4.6V: Text, Images, Video · Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: Text, Images, PDFs, Audio, Video
- Self-hostingGLM-4.6VPublishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | GLM-4.6V | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 66 | 86 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 70 | 100 |
| Context window | 20% | 24 | 61 |
| Overall | 100% | 59/100 | 85/100 |
Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | GLM-4.6VZ.ai (Zhipu) | Gemini 2.5 Flash-LiteGoogle |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | 133.9 |
| ECI rank | — | #118 of 148 |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $0.30 | $0.10 (best) |
| Output | $0.90 | $0.40 (best) |
| Cached input | — | $0.01 |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.45 | $0.175 (best) |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Z.AI API | Official Google API |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 128,000 tokens | 1,048,576 tokens (best) |
| Max output | 32,768 tokens | 65,536 tokens (best) |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | Yes |
| PDFs | No | Yes |
| Audio | No | Yes |
| Video | Yes | Yes |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | Yes |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| API model ID | glm-4.6v | gemini-2.5-flash-lite |
| API providers | 10 | 20 (best) |
| Released | Dec 8, 2025 | Jun 17, 2025 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Apr 2025 | Jan 2025 |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- GLM-4.6V$4.80
- Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite$1.80
Which should you choose?
Which is better: GLM-4.6V or Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite?
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is the better all-round choice, scoring 85/100 against GLM-4.6V (59). It leads on price, inputs & features and context window. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
Which is cheaper, GLM-4.6V or Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite?
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is cheaper at $0.10 input / $0.40 output per million tokens (official Google API price). GLM-4.6V costs $0.30 input / $0.90 output per million tokens (official Z.AI API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.175 per million tokens for Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite versus $0.45 for GLM-4.6V (2.6× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. GLM-4.6V has not been scored yet and Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite has an ECI of 133.9.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for GLM-4.6V and Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite has the largest context window at 1,048,576 tokens, against 128,000 for GLM-4.6V. Maximum output per response: GLM-4.6V up to 32,768, Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite up to 65,536 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
GLM-4.6V accepts text, images and video; Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite accepts text, images, PDFs, audio and video. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
GLM-4.6V publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is proprietary.
Which is newer?
GLM-4.6V is the newest, released Dec 8, 2025. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite came out Jun 17, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: GLM-4.6V Apr 2025, Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite Jan 2025.
How do you decide the winner?
Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Oct 4, 2026.
Related comparisons
- Add Qwen3 Coder NextThree-way comparison
- GLM-4.6V vs Qwen3 Coder NextAlibaba (Qwen)
- GLM-4.6V vs MiniMax-M2.1MiniMax
- GLM-4.6V vs Seed 1.8ByteDance Seed
- GLM-4.6V vs Gemma-SEA-LION-v4-27B-ITAI Singapore
- Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite vs Mistral Small 3.2Mistral AI · ECI 131.7
- Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite vs Qwen3 30B A3BAlibaba (Qwen) · ECI 136.2
