Head-to-head comparison across 2benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
Exaone 4.0 32B
65
GLM-4.7
69
Pick GLM-4.7 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Exaone 4.0 32B only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority.
Knowledge
+21.2 difference
Math
+10.4 difference
Exaone 4.0 32B
GLM-4.7
N/A
$0 / $0
N/A
82 t/s
N/A
1.10s
128K
200K
Pick GLM-4.7 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Exaone 4.0 32B only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority.
GLM-4.7 is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 69 to 65. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
GLM-4.7's sharpest advantage is in mathematics, where it averages 95.7 against 85.3. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is AIME 2025, 85.3% to 95.7%. Exaone 4.0 32B does hit back in knowledge, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
GLM-4.7 gives you the larger context window at 200K, compared with 128K for Exaone 4.0 32B.
GLM-4.7 is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 69 to 65. The biggest single separator in this matchup is AIME 2025, where the scores are 85.3% and 95.7%.
Exaone 4.0 32B has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 81.8 versus 60.6. Inside this category, MMLU-Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
GLM-4.7 has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 95.7 versus 85.3. Inside this category, AIME 2025 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.