Skip to main content

Model comparison

GLM-4.7 vs Soofi S 30B-A3B

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 2 shared benchmark results across 1 category. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.

62/100
Margin
17.0pts
← winning
Soofi Project
45/100
1 category wins0 category wins

Verified leaderboard positions: GLM-4.7 #31; Soofi S 30B-A3B unranked

Evidence parity. GLM-4.7 and Soofi S 30B-A3B share 2 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 29 results are unique to GLM-4.7; 6 to Soofi S 30B-A3B.

Updated July 15, 2026
Shared results
2
GLM-4.7 only
29
Soofi S 30B-A3B only
6
Comparable categories
1 / 8

Pick GLM-4.7 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Soofi S 30B-A3B only becomes the better choice if you need the larger 1M context window or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.

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 provisional aggregate, 62 to 45. 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 knowledge, where it averages 52.1 against 49.9. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is GPQA, 85.7% to 43.4%.

GLM-4.7 is the reasoning model in the pair, while Soofi S 30B-A3B 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. Soofi S 30B-A3B gives you the larger context window at 1M, 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 scores and score margins for GLM-4.7 and Soofi S 30B-A3B
CategoryGLM-4.7ΔSoofi S 30B-A3B
KnowledgeGLM-4.752.1Margin 2.2Soofi S 30B-A3B49.9
AgenticGLM-4.745.7MarginNo overlapSoofi S 30B-A3BNot measured
CodingGLM-4.773.8MarginNo overlapSoofi S 30B-A3BNot measured
MathGLM-4.71.8MarginNo overlapSoofi S 30B-A3BNot measured

Decisive benchmark drivers

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

More
A · GLM-4.7B · Soofi S 30B-A3B
  1. GPQA

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 85.7%B 43.4%
    Winner: GLM-4.7Δ 42.3
    GPQA: GLM-4.7 scored 85.7%; Soofi S 30B-A3B scored 43.4%. GLM-4.7 wins this benchmark.
  2. MMLU-Pro

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 84.3%B 51.4%
    Winner: GLM-4.7Δ 32.9
    MMLU-Pro: GLM-4.7 scored 84.3%; Soofi S 30B-A3B scored 51.4%. GLM-4.7 wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

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

MetricGLM-4.7Soofi S 30B-A3BComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensGLM-4.7$0 input / $0 outputSoofi S 30B-A3B$0 input / $0 outputListed prices are equal.
Generation speedtokens per secondGLM-4.782 tok/sSoofi S 30B-A3BNot availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenGLM-4.71.10 sSoofi S 30B-A3BNot availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensGLM-4.7200KSoofi S 30B-A3B1MSoofi S 30B-A3B lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Soofi S 30B-A3BResult
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 1165Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Soofi S 30B-A3BResult
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
Terminal-Bench HardSource 31.8%Not comparable
AA-SciCodeSource 45.1%Not comparable
AA LiveCodeBenchSource 89.4%Not comparable
HumanEvalSource 73.8%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Soofi S 30B-A3BResult
AA-LCRSource 64.0%Not comparable
CritPtSource 1.7%Not comparable
BBHSource 78.8%Not comparable
DROPSource 66.5%Not comparable
KnowledgeGLM-4.7 wins
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Soofi S 30B-A3BResult
GPQASource 85.7%43.4%GLM-4.7 leads
MMLU-ProSource 84.3%51.4%GLM-4.7 leads
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
GPQA-DSource 43.4%Not comparable
AGIEvalSource 66.9%Not comparable
Math
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Soofi S 30B-A3BResult
AIME 2025Source 95.7%Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 2.439%Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source 0.000%Not comparable
GSM8KSource 86.1%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Soofi S 30B-A3BResult
Design Arena WebsiteSource 1260Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Soofi S 30B-A3BResult
AA-IFBenchSource 67.9%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (2)

Which is better, GLM-4.7 or Soofi S 30B-A3B?

GLM-4.7 is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 62 to 45. The biggest single separator in this matchup is GPQA, where the scores are 85.7% and 43.4%.

Which is better for knowledge tasks, GLM-4.7 or Soofi S 30B-A3B?

GLM-4.7 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 52.1 versus 49.9. Inside this category, GPQA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 15, 2026

The AI models change fast. We track them for you.

A weekly brief for engineers and researchers covering new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.

Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.