Model comparison

GLM-4.6 vs GLM-4.7

Data verified July 23, 2026

Head-to-head evidence from 13 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

GLM-4.6

Z.AI

55.12/100

Margin

6.0pts

winning →

GLM-4.7

Z.AI

61.16/100

1 category wins0 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: GLM-4.6 #85 (Supported); GLM-4.7 #42 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. GLM-4.6 and GLM-4.7 share 13 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 1 result is unique to GLM-4.6; 17 to GLM-4.7.

Updated July 23, 2026

Shared results: 13
GLM-4.6 only: 1
GLM-4.7 only: 17
Comparable categories: 1 / 8

Pick GLM-4.7 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. GLM-4.6 only becomes the better choice if mathematics is the priority.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 13 shared benchmark results across 6 evidence categories; 1 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

GLM-4.7 is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 61.16 to 55.12. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.

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 scores and score margins for GLM-4.6 and GLM-4.7
Category	GLM-4.6	Δ	GLM-4.7
Math	GLM-4.63.4	Margin← 1.6	GLM-4.71.8
Agentic	GLM-4.6Not measured	MarginNo overlap	GLM-4.745.7
Coding	GLM-4.6Not measured	MarginNo overlap	GLM-4.775.4
Knowledge	GLM-4.6Not measured	MarginNo overlap	GLM-4.751.8

Decisive benchmark drivers

The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.

A · GLM-4.6B · GLM-4.7

FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)
Math
Source ↗
A 2.128%B 0.000%
Winner: GLM-4.6Δ 2.1
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4): GLM-4.6 scored 2.128%; GLM-4.7 scored 0.000%. GLM-4.6 wins this benchmark.
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)
Math
Source ↗
A 3.819%B 2.439%
Winner: GLM-4.6Δ 1.4
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3): GLM-4.6 scored 3.819%; GLM-4.7 scored 2.439%. GLM-4.6 wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

Metric	GLM-4.6	GLM-4.7	Comparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens	GLM-4.6Not available	GLM-4.7$0 input / $0 output	A complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per second	GLM-4.6Not available	GLM-4.782 tok/s	A complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first token	GLM-4.6Not available	GLM-4.71.10 s	A complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokens	GLM-4.6200K	GLM-4.7200K	Listed context windows are equal.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic

8 benchmarks

Benchmark	GLM-4.6	GLM-4.7	Result
τ²-bench resultsSource	76.9%	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

Coding

7 benchmarks

Benchmark	GLM-4.6	GLM-4.7	Result
Vibe Code BenchSource	3.09%	—	Not comparable
AA-SciCodeSource	33.1%	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

Reasoning

2 benchmarks

Benchmark	GLM-4.6	GLM-4.7	Result
AA-LCRSource	26.3%	64.0%	GLM-4.7 leads
CritPtSource	0.0%	1.7%	GLM-4.7 leads

Knowledge

9 benchmarks

Benchmark	GLM-4.6	GLM-4.7	Result
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource	23.0%	33.7%	GLM-4.7 leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource	63.2%	85.9%	GLM-4.7 leads
AA-HLESource	5.2%	25.1%	GLM-4.7 leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource	-31.6%	-34.6%	GLM-4.6 leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource	20.8%	29.3%	GLM-4.7 leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource	66.1%	90.3%	GLM-4.6 leads
GPQASource	—	85.7%	Not comparable
MMLU-ProSource	—	84.3%	Not comparable
HLESource	—	24.8%	Not comparable

MathGLM-4.6 wins

3 benchmarks

Benchmark	GLM-4.6	GLM-4.7	Result
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source	3.819%	2.439%	GLM-4.6 leads
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source	2.128%	0.000%	GLM-4.6 leads
AIME 2025Source	—	95.7%	Not comparable

Multimodal

1 benchmarks

Benchmark	GLM-4.6	GLM-4.7	Result
Design Arena WebsiteSource	—	1255	Not comparable

Inst. Following

1 benchmarks

Benchmark	GLM-4.6	GLM-4.7	Result
AA-IFBenchSource	36.7%	67.9%	GLM-4.7 leads

Frequently Asked Questions (2)

Which is better, GLM-4.6 or GLM-4.7?

GLM-4.7 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 61.16 to 55.12. The biggest single separator in this matchup is FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4), where the scores are 2.128% and 0.000%.

Which is better for math, GLM-4.6 or GLM-4.7?

GLM-4.6 has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 3.4 versus 1.8. Inside this category, FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4) is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Explore More

Z.AI Compare Pricing Methodology Find Your Best LLM Overall Rankings

Last updated: July 23, 2026

Choose a model with this week’s evidence

Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.

One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.