Head-to-head comparison across 3benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
GLM-4.7
69
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
65
Verified leaderboard positions: GLM-4.7 unranked · Qwen3.5-122B-A10B #8
Pick GLM-4.7 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Qwen3.5-122B-A10B only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority or you need the larger 262K context window.
Agentic
+10.8 difference
Coding
+1.4 difference
Knowledge
+21.0 difference
GLM-4.7
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
$0 / $0
$0 / $0
82 t/s
N/A
1.10s
N/A
200K
262K
Pick GLM-4.7 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Qwen3.5-122B-A10B only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority or you need the larger 262K context window.
GLM-4.7 is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 69 to 65. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B gives you the larger context window at 262K, compared with 200K for GLM-4.7.
GLM-4.7 is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 69 to 65. The biggest single separator in this matchup is BrowseComp, where the scores are 52% and 63.8%.
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 81.6 versus 60.6. Inside this category, MMLU-Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 72 versus 70.6. Inside this category, SWE-bench Verified is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 56.1 versus 45.3. Inside this category, BrowseComp 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.