Model comparison

DBRX vs GLM-4.7

GLM-4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.0 to 29.4 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 18 shared benchmarks.

DBRX Databricks

29.4

Rank #311 Confirmed

GLM-4.7 Z.ai (Zhipu)

42.0

Rank #124 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. DBRX scores higher in 0 categories and GLM-4.7 in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where GLM-4.7 leads 47.0 to 14.9.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 32.9% for DBRX and 83.3% for GLM-4.7.

Side by side

DBRX and GLM-4.7 specifications
DBRXGLM-4.7
ProviderDatabricksZ.ai (Zhipu)
Noometry Index29.442.0
Released2024-03-272025-12-22
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window—205K
Max output—131K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.60
Output $ / M tokens—$2.20
Results tracked2136

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding GLM-4.7 leads

DBRX: 32.9 (#266), GLM-4.7: 44.0 (#79)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkDBRXGLM-4.7
LMArena Coding11321454
LMArena WebDev—1435
SciCode—45.1%
ALE-Bench—399.48
HumanEval+70.1%—
MBPP+55.8%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

DBRX: —, GLM-4.7: 26.5 (#103)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkDBRXGLM-4.7
Terminal-Bench—33.4%
Vending-Bench 2—2,377

Reasoning GLM-4.7 leads

DBRX: 21.4 (#222), GLM-4.7: 24.3 (#164)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkDBRXGLM-4.7
LMArena Hard Prompts11131443
SimpleBench—47.7%
CritPt—1.7%
Chess Puzzles—6%
Epoch Capabilities Index—143.51

Math GLM-4.7 leads

DBRX: 24.3 (#269), GLM-4.7: 38.6 (#135)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkDBRXGLM-4.7
LMArena Math11451423
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—83.3%
ProofBench—6%
MATH Level 511.7%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)—2.4%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)—0%

Knowledge GLM-4.7 leads

DBRX: 14.9 (#294), GLM-4.7: 47.0 (#80)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkDBRXGLM-4.7
GPQA Diamond32.9%83.3%
LMArena Expert10761424
SimpleQA Verified—32.2%
Vectara Hallucination Rate—11.7%

Multilingual GLM-4.7 leads

DBRX: 29.3 (#268), GLM-4.7: 52.8 (#79)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkDBRXGLM-4.7
LMArena Non-English10711417
LMArena Chinese10681495
LMArena French10961432
LMArena German10571424
LMArena Japanese9901439
LMArena Korean9931399
LMArena Russian10781423
LMArena Spanish10641434

Instruction Following GLM-4.7 leads

DBRX: 57.5 (#270), GLM-4.7: 74.4 (#95)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkDBRXGLM-4.7
LMArena Instruction Following11121411

Long Context GLM-4.7 leads

DBRX: 33.7 (#258), GLM-4.7: 42.8 (#116)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkDBRXGLM-4.7
LMArena Longer Query11121432
CL-bench—15.9%
CL-bench Life—10.9%

Writing & Preference GLM-4.7 leads

DBRX: 33.6 (#275), GLM-4.7: 60.9 (#93)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkDBRXGLM-4.7
LMArena Text11191435
LMArena Creative Writing11041401
LMArena Multi-Turn11111446
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—1413

Frequently asked questions

Is DBRX better than GLM-4.7?

GLM-4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.0 to 29.4 on the Noometry Index.

Is DBRX or GLM-4.7 better for coding?

GLM-4.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 44.0 versus 32.9 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do DBRX and GLM-4.7 share?

18 benchmarks have published results for both models. DBRX has 21 scored results on Noometry and GLM-4.7 has 36.

Related comparisons

Go deeper