The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber vs GLM-4.5

Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber leads the LLM Stats Score 41.1 to 27.7.

Google · Zhipu AI · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber leads the overall LLM Stats Score 41.1 to 27.7, ranking #52 overall.

Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber

  • overall performance matters — it scores 41.1 and ranks #52 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes coding and agents — it leads those capability indexes
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Sep 2026

Choose GLM-4.5

  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber
Google
GLM-4.5
Zhipu AI
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
41.1
#52
27.7
#139
Coding
35.0
#30
16.1
#126
Agents
31.1
#31
10.0
#119
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
— / M
$0.40 / M
Output price
— / M
$1.60 / M
Context window
—
131,072

Individual benchmarks

4 reported for Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber · 14 for GLM-4.5

No common benchmarks found

Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber and GLM-4.5don't have any common benchmark datasets to compare. They may have been evaluated on different testing suites.

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only GLM-4.5 specifies input context (131,072 tokens). Only GLM-4.5 specifies output context (131,072 tokens).

Google
Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Zhipu AI
GLM-4.5
Input131,072 tokens
Output131,072 tokens
Fri Sep 11 2026 • llm-stats.com

License

Usage and distribution terms

Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber is licensed under a proprietary license, while GLM-4.5 uses MIT.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber

Proprietary

Closed source

GLM-4.5

MIT

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber was released on 2026-09-02, while GLM-4.5 was released on 2025-07-28.

Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber is 13 months newer than GLM-4.5.

Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber

Sep 2, 2026

1 weeks ago

1.1yr newer
GLM-4.5

Jul 28, 2025

1.1 years ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.

Unable to compare the recency of their training data.

No cutoff dates available

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber and GLM-4.5 side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber
✓ Preferred
GLM-4.5
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber vs GLM-4.5.

Which is better, Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber or GLM-4.5?

Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber leads the LLM Stats Score 41.1 to 27.7. Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber is made by Google and GLM-4.5 is made by Zhipu AI. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber compare to GLM-4.5 in benchmarks?

Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber scores Gray Swan IPI Benchmark: 94.0%, CyberGym: 86.2%, Google Real-world Vulnerability Discovery: 71.0%, CWE-Bench: 47.2%. GLM-4.5 scores MATH-500: 98.2%, AIME 2024: 91.0%, MMLU-Pro: 84.6%, TAU-bench Retail: 79.7%, GPQA: 79.1%.

What are the context window sizes for Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber and GLM-4.5?

Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber supports an unknown number of tokens and GLM-4.5 supports 131K tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber and GLM-4.5?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (41.1 vs 27.7), licensing (Proprietary vs MIT). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber and GLM-4.5?

Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber is developed by Google and GLM-4.5 is developed by Zhipu AI.

Related comparisons