Model comparison

DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024) vs GLM-4.7

GLM-4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.0 to 37.6 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.

DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024) DeepSeek

37.6

Rank #200 Confirmed

GLM-4.7 Z.ai (Zhipu)

42.0

Rank #124 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024) scores higher in 1 category and GLM-4.7 in 7 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in coding, where GLM-4.7 leads 44.0 to 31.7.

Side by side

DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024) and GLM-4.7 specifications
DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024)GLM-4.7
ProviderDeepSeekZ.ai (Zhipu)
Noometry Index37.642.0
Released2024-09-062025-12-22
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window—205K
Max output—131K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.60
Output $ / M tokens—$2.20
Results tracked2236

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

Category by category

Coding GLM-4.7 leads

DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024): 31.7 (#281), GLM-4.7: 44.0 (#79)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024)GLM-4.7
LMArena Coding13091454
Aider Polyglot17.8%—
LMArena WebDev—1435
SciCode—45.1%
BigCodeBench Instruct48.6%—
BigCodeBench Complete53.2%—
ALE-Bench—399.48
HumanEval+83.5%—
MBPP+74.1%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024): —, GLM-4.7: 26.5 (#103)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024)GLM-4.7
Terminal-Bench—33.4%
Vending-Bench 2—2,377

Reasoning DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024) leads

DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024): 25.6 (#145), GLM-4.7: 24.3 (#164)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024)GLM-4.7
LMArena Hard Prompts12891443
SimpleBench—47.7%
CritPt—1.7%
Chess Puzzles—6%
Epoch Capabilities Index—143.51

Math GLM-4.7 leads

DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024): 35.9 (#177), GLM-4.7: 38.6 (#135)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024)GLM-4.7
LMArena Math12881423
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—83.3%
ProofBench—6%
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)—2.4%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)—0%

Knowledge GLM-4.7 leads

DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024): 34.8 (#193), GLM-4.7: 47.0 (#80)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024)GLM-4.7
LMArena Expert12661424
GPQA Diamond—83.3%
SimpleQA Verified—32.2%
Vectara Hallucination Rate—11.7%

Multilingual GLM-4.7 leads

DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024): 42.5 (#193), GLM-4.7: 52.8 (#79)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024)GLM-4.7
LMArena Non-English12731417
LMArena Chinese13181495
LMArena French12891432
LMArena German12581424
LMArena Japanese12281439
LMArena Korean12091399
LMArena Russian12891423
LMArena Spanish12481434

Instruction Following GLM-4.7 leads

DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024): 67.5 (#194), GLM-4.7: 74.4 (#95)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024)GLM-4.7
LMArena Instruction Following12801411

Long Context GLM-4.7 leads

DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024): 39.5 (#174), GLM-4.7: 42.8 (#116)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024)GLM-4.7
LMArena Longer Query13011432
CL-bench—15.9%
CL-bench Life—10.9%

Writing & Preference GLM-4.7 leads

DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024): 49.8 (#187), GLM-4.7: 60.9 (#93)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024)GLM-4.7
LMArena Text12941435
LMArena Creative Writing12851401
LMArena Multi-Turn12971446
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—1413

Frequently asked questions

Is DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024) better than GLM-4.7?

GLM-4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.0 to 37.6 on the Noometry Index.

Is DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024) or GLM-4.7 better for coding?

GLM-4.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 44.0 versus 31.7 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024) and GLM-4.7 share?

17 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024) has 22 scored results on Noometry and GLM-4.7 has 36.

Related comparisons

Go deeper