Head-to-head comparison across 1benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
Composer 2.5
64
GLM-4.7
67
Pick GLM-4.7 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Composer 2.5 only becomes the better choice if agentic is the priority.
Agentic
+24.0 difference
Composer 2.5
GLM-4.7
$0.5 / $2.5
$0 / $0
N/A
82 t/s
N/A
1.10s
200K
200K
Pick GLM-4.7 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Composer 2.5 only becomes the better choice if agentic is the priority.
GLM-4.7 has the cleaner provisional overall profile here, landing at 67 versus 64. It is a real lead, but still close enough that category-level strengths matter more than the headline number.
Composer 2.5 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $0.50 input / $2.50 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for GLM-4.7. That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone.
GLM-4.7 is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 67 to 64. The biggest single separator in this matchup is Terminal-Bench 2.0, where the scores are 69.3% and 41%.
Composer 2.5 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 69.3 versus 45.3. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 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.