Model comparison

Deepseek Coder v2 vs GLM-4.7

GLM-4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.0 to 35.9 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.

Deepseek Coder v2 DeepSeek

35.9

Rank #220 Confirmed

GLM-4.7 Z.ai (Zhipu)

42.0

Rank #124 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Deepseek Coder v2 scores higher in 0 categories and GLM-4.7 in 8 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where GLM-4.7 leads 60.9 to 38.2.

Side by side

Deepseek Coder v2 and GLM-4.7 specifications
Deepseek Coder v2GLM-4.7
ProviderDeepSeekZ.ai (Zhipu)
Noometry Index35.942.0
Released2024-06-172025-12-22
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window—205K
Max output—131K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.60
Output $ / M tokens—$2.20
Results tracked2436

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

Category by category

Coding GLM-4.7 leads

Deepseek Coder v2: 38.1 (#183), GLM-4.7: 44.0 (#79)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepseek Coder v2GLM-4.7
LMArena Coding12511454
LMArena WebDev—1435
SciCode—45.1%
BigCodeBench Instruct48.2%—
BigCodeBench Complete59.7%—
ALE-Bench—399.48
HumanEval+82.3%—
MBPP+75.1%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Deepseek Coder v2: —, GLM-4.7: 26.5 (#103)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepseek Coder v2GLM-4.7
Terminal-Bench—33.4%
Vending-Bench 2—2,377

Reasoning Too close to call

Deepseek Coder v2: 23.6 (#176), GLM-4.7: 24.3 (#164)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepseek Coder v2GLM-4.7
LMArena Hard Prompts12071443
SimpleBench—47.7%
CritPt—1.7%
Chess Puzzles—6%
Epoch Capabilities Index—143.51
WinoGrande83.7%—

Math GLM-4.7 leads

Deepseek Coder v2: 34.9 (#190), GLM-4.7: 38.6 (#135)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepseek Coder v2GLM-4.7
LMArena Math12411423
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—83.3%
ProofBench—6%
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)—2.4%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)—0%
GSM8K94.5%—

Knowledge GLM-4.7 leads

Deepseek Coder v2: 32.3 (#212), GLM-4.7: 47.0 (#80)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepseek Coder v2GLM-4.7
LMArena Expert11811424
GPQA Diamond—83.3%
SimpleQA Verified—32.2%
Vectara Hallucination Rate—11.7%
ARC (AI2) Challenge64.3%—

Multilingual GLM-4.7 leads

Deepseek Coder v2: 36.3 (#240), GLM-4.7: 52.8 (#79)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepseek Coder v2GLM-4.7
LMArena Non-English11821417
LMArena Chinese12011495
LMArena French11851432
LMArena German11641424
LMArena Japanese11261439
LMArena Korean11041399
LMArena Russian11881423
LMArena Spanish11531434

Instruction Following GLM-4.7 leads

Deepseek Coder v2: 61.7 (#242), GLM-4.7: 74.4 (#95)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepseek Coder v2GLM-4.7
LMArena Instruction Following11801411

Long Context GLM-4.7 leads

Deepseek Coder v2: 37.0 (#224), GLM-4.7: 42.8 (#116)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepseek Coder v2GLM-4.7
LMArena Longer Query12191432
CL-bench—15.9%
CL-bench Life—10.9%

Writing & Preference GLM-4.7 leads

Deepseek Coder v2: 38.2 (#253), GLM-4.7: 60.9 (#93)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepseek Coder v2GLM-4.7
LMArena Text11911435
LMArena Creative Writing11201401
LMArena Multi-Turn11771446
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—1413

Frequently asked questions

Is Deepseek Coder v2 better than GLM-4.7?

GLM-4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.0 to 35.9 on the Noometry Index.

Is Deepseek Coder v2 or GLM-4.7 better for coding?

GLM-4.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 44.0 versus 38.1 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Deepseek Coder v2 and GLM-4.7 share?

17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Deepseek Coder v2 has 24 scored results on Noometry and GLM-4.7 has 36.

Related comparisons

Go deeper