Model comparison
Claude 3.7 Sonnet vs GLM-4.6
GLM-4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.4 to 39.5 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 20 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 20 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude 3.7 Sonnet scores higher in 3 categories and GLM-4.6 in 6 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in multilingual, where GLM-4.6 leads 53.5 to 44.1.
- GLM-4.6 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Claude 3.7 Sonnet | GLM-4.6 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Z.ai (Zhipu) |
| Noometry Index | 39.5 | 41.4 |
| Released | 2025-02-24 | 2025-09-30 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | 205K |
| Max output | — | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.60 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $2.20 |
| Results tracked | 58 | 29 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Too close to call
Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 40.6 (#136), GLM-4.6: 40.1 (#148)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 52.8% | 55.4% |
| LMArena Coding | 1361 | 1449 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 61% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | 64.9% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1340 |
| SciCode | — | 38.4% |
| GSO | 3.8% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 74.5% | — |
| CadEval | 54% | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 340.82 |
Agentic & Tool Use Claude 3.7 Sonnet leads
Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 34.1 (#50), GLM-4.6: 32.3 (#66)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | — | 24.5% |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 72.4% |
| TheAgentCompany | 30.9% | — |
| Cybench | 20% | — |
| DeepResearch Bench | 43.6% | — |
| OSWorld | 35.8% | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 60% | — |
Reasoning GLM-4.6 leads
Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 18.6 (#277), GLM-4.6: 23.7 (#172)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1333 | 1440 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 0.9% | — |
| SimpleBench | 46.4% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 47.4% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 28.6% | — |
| CritPt | — | 1.1% |
| EnigmaEval | 4.2% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 87.8% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 74% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 141.16 | — |
| ForecastBench | 61.8 | — |
| LiveBench | 76.1% | — |
Math GLM-4.6 leads
Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 37.5 (#153), GLM-4.6: 39.1 (#111)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1337 | 1432 |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 4.1% | 3.8% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 57.8% | — |
| Omni-MATH | 33% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 79% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 91.2% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 2.1% |
Knowledge Too close to call
Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 39.8 (#130), GLM-4.6: 40.2 (#124)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1321 | 1431 |
| GPQA Diamond | 79.7% | — |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 8% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 78.4% | — |
| Confabulations | 14.7% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 9.5% |
| GPQA (HELM) | 60.8% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 33.7 (#95), GLM-4.6: —
| Benchmark | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1169 | — |
| GeoBench | 68% | — |
| VPCT | 39% | — |
| SpatialViz-Bench | 33.9% | — |
Multilingual GLM-4.6 leads
Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 44.1 (#179), GLM-4.6: 53.5 (#66)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1296 | 1426 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1299 | 1499 |
| LMArena French | 1303 | 1459 |
| LMArena German | 1301 | 1447 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1267 | 1393 |
| LMArena Korean | 1249 | 1400 |
| LMArena Russian | 1311 | 1419 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1298 | 1436 |
Instruction Following GLM-4.6 leads
Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 72.9 (#125), GLM-4.6: 74.3 (#98)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1352 | 1410 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 81.3% | — |
| IFEval | 83.4% | — |
Long Context Claude 3.7 Sonnet leads
Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 50.3 (#10), GLM-4.6: 43.4 (#94)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1373 | 1422 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 83.3% | — |
Writing & Preference GLM-4.6 leads
Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 54.4 (#150), GLM-4.6: 61.1 (#90)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1314 | 1440 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1332 | 1411 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1412 | 1411 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1339 | 1427 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 81.1% | — |
| WildBench | 81.4% | — |
| LiveBench Language | 59.9% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude 3.7 Sonnet better than GLM-4.6?
GLM-4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.4 to 39.5 on the Noometry Index.
Is Claude 3.7 Sonnet or GLM-4.6 better for coding?
They score almost the same on coding (40.6 vs 40.1); test both on your own repository before choosing.
How many benchmarks do Claude 3.7 Sonnet and GLM-4.6 share?
20 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude 3.7 Sonnet has 58 scored results on Noometry and GLM-4.6 has 29.