Z.ai (Zhipu AI)GLM-4.6VSZ.ai (Zhipu AI)GLM-4.7
Our Take
We recommend choosing GLM-4.7 because it outperforms or matches GLM-4.6 across reasoning, coding, and context capacity while being cheaper or equal in cost. Choose GLM-4.7 for superior overall value.
▶WHY?
Benchmark Calculations & Evidence:
Coding Benchmarks: Both models were evaluated on the SWE-bench Verified benchmark. GLM-4.7 scored 73.8%, while GLM-4.6 scored 68%.
Reasoning Benchmarks: Both models were evaluated on the GPQA Diamond benchmark. GLM-4.7 scored 85.7%, while GLM-4.6 scored 82.9%.
Context Window: GLM-4.7 supports a 203k context window compared to 203k for GLM-4.6.
Cost Comparison: GLM-4.7 blended CPM is $0.6/$2.2 compared to $0.6/$2.2 for GLM-4.6.
Was this recommendation helpful?
Benchmarks & Scores
Coding (swe-bench-verified)
68%multi-file code and clearly defined tasks
Reasoning (gpqa-diamond)
82.9%graduate-level science QA
Cost & Context
Cost (per 1M tokens)
$1.00Input: $0.60 | Output: $2.20Context Window
202.75k tokensBenchmarks & Scores
Coding (swe-bench-verified)Winner (+5.8%)
73.8%multi-file code and clearly defined tasks
Reasoning (gpqa-diamond)Winner (+2.8%)
85.7%graduate-level science QA
Cost & Context
Cost (per 1M tokens)
$1.00Input: $0.60 | Output: $2.20Context Window
202.75k tokensFrequently Asked Questions about GLM-4.6 vs GLM-4.7
Both GLM-4.6 and GLM-4.7 cost the same, with a blended cost of $1.00 per 1 million tokens.
GLM-4.7 is better for coding tasks on this benchmark. It scores 73.8% on swe-bench-verified (multi-file code and clearly defined tasks) compared to GLM-4.6 which scores 68%.
Related Matchups
Explore similar comparisons for GLM-4.6 and GLM-4.7.
Do you want to find a model for your constraints?
Use our interactive model finder to filter LLMs by reasoning capability, coding performance, cost, and context length.