Skip to main content
BenchLM
Advertise

Model comparison

GLM-4.7 vs o4-mini (high)

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 2 shared benchmark results across 1 category. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

61.16/100
Margin
11.2pts
← winning
49.98/100
0 category wins1 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: GLM-4.7 #42 (Supported); o4-mini (high) #118 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. GLM-4.7 and o4-mini (high) share 2 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 28 results are unique to GLM-4.7; 0 to o4-mini (high).

Updated July 20, 2026
Shared results
2
GLM-4.7 only
28
o4-mini (high) only
0
Comparable categories
1 / 8

Pick GLM-4.7 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. o4-mini (high) only becomes the better choice if mathematics is the priority.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 2 shared benchmark results across 1 evidence category; 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 49.98. 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-4.7 and o4-mini (high)
CategoryGLM-4.7Δo4-mini (high)
MathGLM-4.71.8Margin→ 18.4o4-mini (high)20.2
AgenticGLM-4.745.7MarginNo overlapo4-mini (high)Not measured
CodingGLM-4.775.4MarginNo overlapo4-mini (high)Not measured
KnowledgeGLM-4.751.8MarginNo overlapo4-mini (high)Not measured

Decisive benchmark drivers

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

More
A · GLM-4.7B · o4-mini (high)

  1. FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)

    Math
    Source ↗
    A 2.439%B 24.828%
    Winner: o4-mini (high)Δ 22.4
    FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3): GLM-4.7 scored 2.439%; o4-mini (high) scored 24.828%. o4-mini (high) wins this benchmark.

  2. FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)

    Math
    Source ↗
    A 0.000%B 6.250%
    Winner: o4-mini (high)Δ 6.3
    FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4): GLM-4.7 scored 0.000%; o4-mini (high) scored 6.250%. o4-mini (high) wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

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

MetricGLM-4.7o4-mini (high)Comparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensGLM-4.7$0 input / $0 outputo4-mini (high)Not availableA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondGLM-4.782 tok/so4-mini (high)161 tok/so4-mini (high) has the higher measured throughput.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenGLM-4.71.10 so4-mini (high)21.94 sGLM-4.7 reaches the first token sooner.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensGLM-4.7200Ko4-mini (high)200KListed context windows are equal.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkGLM-4.7o4-mini (high)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%—Not comparable
Gert LabsSource 39.95%—Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 33.3%—Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 1165—Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkGLM-4.7o4-mini (high)Result
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%—Not comparable
AA LiveCodeBenchSource 89.4%—Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkGLM-4.7o4-mini (high)Result
AA-LCRSource 64.0%—Not comparable
CritPtSource 1.7%—Not comparable
Knowledge
BenchmarkGLM-4.7o4-mini (high)Result
GPQASource 85.7%—Not comparable
MMLU-ProSource 84.3%—Not comparable
HLESource 24.8%—Not comparable
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 33.7%—Not comparable
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 85.9%—Not comparable
AA-HLESource 25.1%—Not comparable
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -34.6%—Not comparable
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 29.3%—Not comparable
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 90.3%—Not comparable
Matho4-mini (high) wins
BenchmarkGLM-4.7o4-mini (high)Result
AIME 2025Source 95.7%—Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 2.439%24.828%o4-mini (high) leads
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source 0.000%6.250%o4-mini (high) leads
Multimodal
BenchmarkGLM-4.7o4-mini (high)Result
Design Arena WebsiteSource 1258—Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkGLM-4.7o4-mini (high)Result
AA-IFBenchSource 67.9%—Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (2)

Which is better, GLM-4.7 or o4-mini (high)?

GLM-4.7 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 61.16 to 49.98. The biggest single separator in this matchup is FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3), where the scores are 2.439% and 24.828%.

Which is better for math, GLM-4.7 or o4-mini (high)?

o4-mini (high) has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 20.2 versus 1.8. Inside this category, FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3) 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 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.