Model comparison
Claude 3 Sonnet vs GLM-4.7-Flash
GLM-4.7-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.8 to 29.0 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 18 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude 3 Sonnet scores higher in 0 categories and GLM-4.7-Flash in 8 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where GLM-4.7-Flash leads 36.1 to 10.7.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 2.5% for Claude 3 Sonnet and 58.3% for GLM-4.7-Flash.
- GLM-4.7-Flash has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Claude 3 Sonnet | GLM-4.7-Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Z.ai (Zhipu) |
| Noometry Index | 29.0 | 38.8 |
| Released | 2024-02-29 | 2026-01-19 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | 200K |
| Max output | — | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.06 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $0.40 |
| Results tracked | 30 | 21 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GLM-4.7-Flash leads
Claude 3 Sonnet: 29.6 (#302), GLM-4.7-Flash: 40.6 (#135)
| Benchmark | Claude 3 Sonnet | GLM-4.7-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1223 | 1383 |
| WeirdML | 10.2% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 42.7% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 53.8% | — |
| HumanEval+ | 64% | — |
| MBPP+ | 69.3% | — |
Reasoning Too close to call
Claude 3 Sonnet: 20.5 (#237), GLM-4.7-Flash: 20.9 (#229)
| Benchmark | Claude 3 Sonnet | GLM-4.7-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1197 | 1356 |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 0% |
| DTBench | 53.6% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 120.7 | — |
| WinoGrande | 75.1% | — |
Math GLM-4.7-Flash leads
Claude 3 Sonnet: 10.7 (#310), GLM-4.7-Flash: 36.1 (#173)
| Benchmark | Claude 3 Sonnet | GLM-4.7-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 2.5% | 58.3% |
| LMArena Math | 1213 | 1355 |
| MATH Level 5 | 18.2% | — |
Knowledge GLM-4.7-Flash leads
Claude 3 Sonnet: 21.1 (#276), GLM-4.7-Flash: 35.5 (#184)
| Benchmark | Claude 3 Sonnet | GLM-4.7-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 40.6% | 60.5% |
| LMArena Expert | 1173 | 1357 |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 9.3% |
| MMLU | 75.9% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Claude 3 Sonnet: 25.2 (#125), GLM-4.7-Flash: —
| Benchmark | Claude 3 Sonnet | GLM-4.7-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 984 | — |
Multilingual GLM-4.7-Flash leads
Claude 3 Sonnet: 37.8 (#234), GLM-4.7-Flash: 46.5 (#158)
| Benchmark | Claude 3 Sonnet | GLM-4.7-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1205 | 1330 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1189 | 1403 |
| LMArena French | 1229 | 1332 |
| LMArena German | 1204 | 1337 |
| LMArena Korean | 1128 | 1283 |
| LMArena Russian | 1227 | 1332 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1204 | 1350 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1131 | — |
Instruction Following GLM-4.7-Flash leads
Claude 3 Sonnet: 62.8 (#235), GLM-4.7-Flash: 70.1 (#167)
| Benchmark | Claude 3 Sonnet | GLM-4.7-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1199 | 1327 |
Long Context GLM-4.7-Flash leads
Claude 3 Sonnet: 36.7 (#228), GLM-4.7-Flash: 40.9 (#148)
| Benchmark | Claude 3 Sonnet | GLM-4.7-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1211 | 1345 |
Writing & Preference GLM-4.7-Flash leads
Claude 3 Sonnet: 42.1 (#238), GLM-4.7-Flash: 47.4 (#210)
| Benchmark | Claude 3 Sonnet | GLM-4.7-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1218 | 1351 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1186 | 1297 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1227 | 1342 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1125 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude 3 Sonnet better than GLM-4.7-Flash?
GLM-4.7-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.8 to 29.0 on the Noometry Index.
Is Claude 3 Sonnet or GLM-4.7-Flash better for coding?
GLM-4.7-Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.6 versus 29.6 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Claude 3 Sonnet and GLM-4.7-Flash share?
18 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude 3 Sonnet has 30 scored results on Noometry and GLM-4.7-Flash has 21.