Head-to-head comparison across 1benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
GLM-4.7
71
Grok Code Fast 1
42
Pick GLM-4.7 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Grok Code Fast 1 only becomes the better choice if coding is the priority or you need the larger 256K context window.
Coding
+0.2 difference
GLM-4.7
Grok Code Fast 1
$0 / $0
$null / $null
82 t/s
172 t/s
1.10s
2.81s
200K
256K
Pick GLM-4.7 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Grok Code Fast 1 only becomes the better choice if coding is the priority or you need the larger 256K context window.
GLM-4.7 is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 71 to 42. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
GLM-4.7 is the reasoning model in the pair, while Grok Code Fast 1 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. Grok Code Fast 1 gives you the larger context window at 256K, compared with 200K for GLM-4.7.
GLM-4.7 is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 71 to 42. The biggest single separator in this matchup is SWE-bench Verified, where the scores are 73.8% and 70.8%.
Grok Code Fast 1 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 70.8 versus 70.6. Inside this category, SWE-bench Verified 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.