Model comparison
DeepSeek-R1 vs GLM-4.7
Head-to-head evidence from 12 shared benchmark results across 5 categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
Verified leaderboard positions: DeepSeek-R1 unranked; GLM-4.7 #32
Evidence parity. DeepSeek-R1 and GLM-4.7 share 12 comparable benchmark results. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 0 results are unique to DeepSeek-R1; 19 to GLM-4.7.
Updated July 14, 2026- Shared results
- 12
- DeepSeek-R1 only
- 0
- GLM-4.7 only
- 19
- Comparable categories
- 0 / 8
Benchmark data for DeepSeek-R1 and GLM-4.7 is coming soon on BenchLM.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 12 shared benchmark results across 5 evidence categories; 0 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
BenchLM has partial data for these models, but not enough overlapping benchmark coverage to produce a fair score-level comparison yet.
DeepSeek-R1 is priced at $0.55 input / $2.19 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for GLM-4.7. GLM-4.7 has the larger context window at 200K, compared with 128K for DeepSeek-R1.
Category breakdown
Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.
| Category | DeepSeek-R1 | Δ | GLM-4.7 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agentic | DeepSeek-R1Not measured | MarginNo overlap | GLM-4.745.7 |
| Coding | DeepSeek-R1Not measured | MarginNo overlap | GLM-4.773.8 |
| Knowledge | DeepSeek-R1Not measured | MarginNo overlap | GLM-4.752.1 |
| Math | DeepSeek-R1Not measured | MarginNo overlap | GLM-4.71.8 |
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | DeepSeek-R1 | GLM-4.7 | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | DeepSeek-R1$0.55 input / $2.19 output | GLM-4.7$0 input / $0 output | GLM-4.7 has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | DeepSeek-R1Not available | GLM-4.782 tok/s | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | DeepSeek-R1Not available | GLM-4.71.10 s | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | DeepSeek-R1128K | GLM-4.7200K | GLM-4.7 lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic8 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-R1 | GLM-4.7 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Tau2-TelecomSource | 36.5% | 95.9% | GLM-4.7 leads |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 41% | Not comparable |
| BrowseCompSource | — | 52% | Not comparable |
| VITA-BenchSource | — | 15.5% | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | — | 25.4% | Not comparable |
| Gert LabsSource | — | 39.95% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 33.3% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 1165 | Not comparable |
Coding7 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-R1 | GLM-4.7 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench HardSource | 15.9% | 31.8% | GLM-4.7 leads |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 40.3% | 45.1% | GLM-4.7 leads |
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | — | 73.8% | Not comparable |
| LiveCodeBenchSource | — | 84.9% | Not comparable |
| SWE-RebenchSource | — | 58.7% | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | — | 45.3% | Not comparable |
| AA LiveCodeBenchSource | — | 89.4% | Not comparable |
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-R1 | GLM-4.7 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 20.1% | 33.7% | GLM-4.7 leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 81.3% | 85.9% | GLM-4.7 leads |
| AA-HLESource | 14.9% | 25.1% | GLM-4.7 leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -27.1% | -34.6% | DeepSeek-R1 leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 31.0% | 29.3% | DeepSeek-R1 leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 84.0% | 90.3% | DeepSeek-R1 leads |
| GPQASource | — | 85.7% | Not comparable |
| MMLU-ProSource | — | 84.3% | Not comparable |
| HLESource | — | 24.8% | Not comparable |
Math3 benchmarks
Multimodal1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-R1 | GLM-4.7 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | — | 1260 | Not comparable |
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-R1 | GLM-4.7 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 39.6% | 67.9% | GLM-4.7 leads |
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Can I compare DeepSeek-R1 and GLM-4.7 on BenchLM yet?
Not fully yet. BenchLM is tracking both models, but the sourced benchmark breakdown for this comparison is still coming soon.
Why does this comparison show “coming soon”?
BenchLM only shows category winners and benchmark-level calls when we have sourced results that can be compared fairly. For these models, the public benchmark coverage is not complete enough yet.
What data is available for DeepSeek-R1 and GLM-4.7 today?
DeepSeek-R1: $0.55 input / $2.19 output per 1M tokens GLM-4.7: $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens Both model pages still include creator, context window, reasoning mode, and other metadata while benchmark coverage fills in.
Self-host vs API cost
Estimates at 50,000 req/day · 1000 tokens/req average.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
The AI models change fast. We track them for you.
A weekly brief for engineers and researchers covering new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.