Skip to main content

Model comparison

GLM-4.7 vs Grok 4

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 14 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

61.16/100
Margin
0.7pts
← winning
60.42/100
0 category wins1 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: GLM-4.7 #42 (Supported); Grok 4 #50 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. GLM-4.7 and Grok 4 share 14 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 16 results are unique to GLM-4.7; 2 to Grok 4.

Updated July 20, 2026
Shared results
14
GLM-4.7 only
16
Grok 4 only
2
Comparable categories
1 / 8

Pick GLM-4.7 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Grok 4 only becomes the better choice if mathematics is the priority or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 14 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 has the cleaner BenchAlign overall profile here, landing at 61.16 versus 60.42. It is a real lead, but still close enough that category-level strengths matter more than the headline number.

GLM-4.7 is the reasoning model in the pair, while Grok 4 is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. GLM-4.7 gives you the larger context window at 200K, compared with 128K for Grok 4.

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-4.7 and Grok 4
CategoryGLM-4.7ΔGrok 4
MathGLM-4.71.8Margin 13.5Grok 415.3
AgenticGLM-4.745.7MarginNo overlapGrok 4Not measured
CodingGLM-4.775.4MarginNo overlapGrok 4Not measured
KnowledgeGLM-4.751.8MarginNo overlapGrok 4Not measured

Decisive benchmark drivers

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

More
A · GLM-4.7B · Grok 4
  1. FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)

    Math
    Source ↗
    A 2.439%B 19.655%
    Winner: Grok 4Δ 17.2
    FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3): GLM-4.7 scored 2.439%; Grok 4 scored 19.655%. Grok 4 wins this benchmark.
  2. FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)

    Math
    Source ↗
    A 0.000%B 2.083%
    Winner: Grok 4Δ 2.1
    FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4): GLM-4.7 scored 0.000%; Grok 4 scored 2.083%. Grok 4 wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

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

MetricGLM-4.7Grok 4Comparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensGLM-4.7$0 input / $0 outputGrok 4Not availableA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondGLM-4.782 tok/sGrok 454 tok/sGLM-4.7 has the higher measured throughput.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenGLM-4.71.10 sGrok 415.60 sGLM-4.7 reaches the first token sooner.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensGLM-4.7200KGrok 4128KGLM-4.7 lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Grok 4Result
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 41%Not comparable
BrowseCompSource 52%Not comparable
VITA-BenchSource 15.5%Not comparable
AA Agentic IndexSource 25.4%Not comparable
τ²-bench resultsSource 95.9%74.9%GLM-4.7 leads
Gert LabsSource 39.95%42.34%Grok 4 leads
GDPval-AASource 33.3%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 1165Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Grok 4Result
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-SciCodeSource 45.1%45.7%Grok 4 leads
AA LiveCodeBenchSource 89.4%Not comparable
React Native EvalsSource 72.6%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Grok 4Result
AA-LCRSource 64.0%68.0%Grok 4 leads
CritPtSource 1.7%2.0%Grok 4 leads
Knowledge
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Grok 4Result
GPQASource 85.7%Not comparable
MMLU-ProSource 84.3%Not comparable
HLESource 24.8%Not comparable
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 33.7%33.3%GLM-4.7 leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 85.9%87.7%Grok 4 leads
AA-HLESource 25.1%23.9%GLM-4.7 leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -34.6%3.8%Grok 4 leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 29.3%41.4%Grok 4 leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 90.3%64.2%Grok 4 leads
MathGrok 4 wins
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Grok 4Result
AIME 2025Source 95.7%Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 2.439%19.655%Grok 4 leads
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source 0.000%2.083%Grok 4 leads
Multimodal
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Grok 4Result
Design Arena WebsiteSource 1258Not comparable
AA-MMMU-ProSource 68.8%Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Grok 4Result
AA-IFBenchSource 67.9%53.7%GLM-4.7 leads
Frequently Asked Questions (2)

Which is better, GLM-4.7 or Grok 4?

GLM-4.7 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 61.16 to 60.42. The biggest single separator in this matchup is FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3), where the scores are 2.439% and 19.655%.

Which is better for math, GLM-4.7 or Grok 4?

Grok 4 has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 15.3 versus 1.8. Inside this category, FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3) is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 20, 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.