Model comparison
GLM-4.7 vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B
Head-to-head evidence from 17 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: GLM-4.7 #46 (Supported); Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B #159 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. GLM-4.7 and Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B share 17 comparable benchmark results. 2 of 8 categories are comparable. 13 results are unique to GLM-4.7; 12 to Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B.
Updated July 27, 2026- Shared results
- 17
- GLM-4.7 only
- 13
- Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B only
- 12
- Comparable categories
- 2 / 8
Pick GLM-4.7 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority or you need the larger 256K context window.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 17 shared benchmark results across 6 evidence categories; 2 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, 60.39 to 43.32. 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 coding, where it averages 75.4 against 32. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is GPQA, 85.7% to 72.2%. Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B does hit back in knowledge, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B gives you the larger context window at 256K, compared with 200K for GLM-4.7.
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 | GLM-4.7 | Δ | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B |
|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | GLM-4.775.4 | Margin← 43.4 | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B32.0 |
| Knowledge | GLM-4.751.8 | Margin→ 24.5 | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B76.3 |
| Agentic | GLM-4.745.7 | MarginNo overlap | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BNot measured |
| Math | GLM-4.71.8 | MarginNo overlap | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BNot measured |
| Multimodal | GLM-4.7Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B76.3 |
| Inst. Following | GLM-4.7Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B74.2 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
GPQA
KnowledgeA 85.7%B 72.2%Winner: GLM-4.7Δ 13.5GPQA: GLM-4.7 scored 85.7%; Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B scored 72.2%. GLM-4.7 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
MMLU-Pro
KnowledgeA 84.3%B 77.3%Winner: GLM-4.7Δ 7MMLU-Pro: GLM-4.7 scored 84.3%; Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B scored 77.3%. GLM-4.7 wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | GLM-4.7 | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | GLM-4.7$0 input / $0 output | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B$0 input / $0 output | Listed prices are equal. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | GLM-4.782 tok/s | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | GLM-4.71.10 s | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | GLM-4.7200K | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B256K | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7 | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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% | 45.3% | GLM-4.7 leads |
| Gert LabsSource | 39.95% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 33.3% | 0.0% | GLM-4.7 leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 1166 | 465 | GLM-4.7 leads |
| OSWorldSource | — | 47.4% | Not comparable |
CodingGLM-4.7 wins7 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7 | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 73.8% | — | Not comparable |
| LiveCodeBenchSource | 84.9% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE-RebenchSource | 58.7% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | 45.3% | 13.8% | GLM-4.7 leads |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 45.1% | 27.8% | GLM-4.7 leads |
| AA LiveCodeBenchSource | 89.4% | — | Not comparable |
| SciCodeSource | — | 32% | Not comparable |
Reasoning2 benchmarks
KnowledgeNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B wins10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7 | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 85.7% | 72.2% | GLM-4.7 leads |
| MMLU-ProSource | 84.3% | 77.3% | GLM-4.7 leads |
| HLESource | 24.8% | — | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 33.7% | 14.9% | GLM-4.7 leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 85.9% | 46.9% | GLM-4.7 leads |
| AA-HLESource | 25.1% | 5.3% | GLM-4.7 leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -34.6% | -56.0% | GLM-4.7 leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 29.3% | 14.8% | GLM-4.7 leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 90.3% | 83.1% | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B leads |
| GPQA-DSource | — | 72.2% | Not comparable |
Math3 benchmarks
Multimodal9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7 | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | 1251 | — | Not comparable |
| MMMUSource | — | 70.8% | Not comparable |
| MMLongBench-DocSource | — | 57.5% | Not comparable |
| CharXivSource | — | 76.3% | Not comparable |
| ScreenSpot ProSource | — | 57.8% | Not comparable |
| Video-MME (w/o subtitle)Source | — | 72.2% | Not comparable |
| AI2D_TESTSource | — | 88.5% | Not comparable |
| RefCOCO (avg)Source | — | 90.5% | Not comparable |
| AA-MMMU-ProSource | — | 53.2% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Which is better, GLM-4.7 or Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B?
GLM-4.7 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 60.39 to 43.32. The biggest single separator in this matchup is GPQA, where the scores are 85.7% and 72.2%.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, GLM-4.7 or Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B?
Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 76.3 versus 51.8. Inside this category, AA-GPQA Diamond is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for coding, GLM-4.7 or Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B?
GLM-4.7 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 75.4 versus 32. Inside this category, AA Coding Index is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
Know when it’s worth switching models
The model to choose, the cheaper alternative, and the release we would wait on.
One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.