Model comparison
GLM-4.7-Flash vs o3-mini
Head-to-head evidence from 0 shared benchmark results across 0 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: GLM-4.7-Flash #112 (Supported); o3-mini #141 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. GLM-4.7-Flash and o3-mini share 0 comparable benchmark results. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 0 results are unique to GLM-4.7-Flash; 10 to o3-mini.
Updated July 24, 2026- Shared results
- 0
- GLM-4.7-Flash only
- 0
- o3-mini only
- 10
- Comparable categories
- 0 / 8
Benchmark data for GLM-4.7-Flash and o3-mini is coming soon on BenchLM.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 0 shared benchmark results across 0 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 does not have sourced benchmark coverage for GLM-4.7-Flash yet. This comparison is currently limited to metadata such as context window, reasoning mode, and pricing where available.
o3-mini is priced at $1.10 input / $4.40 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for GLM-4.7-Flash.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | GLM-4.7-Flash | o3-mini | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | GLM-4.7-Flash$0 input / $0 output | o3-mini$1.1 input / $4.4 output | GLM-4.7-Flash has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | GLM-4.7-Flash95 tok/s | o3-mini160 tok/s | o3-mini has the higher measured throughput. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | GLM-4.7-Flash0.91 s | o3-mini7.12 s | GLM-4.7-Flash reaches the first token sooner. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | GLM-4.7-Flash200K | o3-mini200K | Listed context windows are equal. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | o3-mini | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| τ²-bench resultsSource | — | 28.7% | Not comparable |
Coding2 benchmarks
Knowledge5 benchmarks
Math1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | o3-mini | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AIME 2024Source | — | 87.3% | Not comparable |
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | o3-mini | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| IFEvalSource | — | 93.9% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Can I compare GLM-4.7-Flash and o3-mini 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 GLM-4.7-Flash and o3-mini today?
GLM-4.7-Flash: $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens o3-mini: $1.10 input / $4.40 output per 1M tokens Both model pages still include creator, context window, reasoning mode, and other metadata while benchmark coverage fills in.