Head-to-head comparison across 1benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
Claude 4 Sonnet
52
GLM-4.7
71
Pick GLM-4.7 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Claude 4 Sonnet only becomes the better choice if coding is the priority or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.
Coding
+2.1 difference
Claude 4 Sonnet
GLM-4.7
$null / $null
$0 / $0
40 t/s
82 t/s
1.33s
1.10s
200K
200K
Pick GLM-4.7 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Claude 4 Sonnet only becomes the better choice if coding is the priority or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.
GLM-4.7 is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 71 to 52. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
GLM-4.7 is the reasoning model in the pair, while Claude 4 Sonnet is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use.
GLM-4.7 is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 71 to 52. The biggest single separator in this matchup is SWE-bench Verified, where the scores are 72.7% and 73.8%.
Claude 4 Sonnet has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 72.7 versus 70.6. Inside this category, SWE-bench Verified is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
For engineers, researchers, and the plain curious — a weekly brief on new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.