Noometry

Model comparison

Seed 2.0 Pro vs GLM-4.7

Seed 2.0 Pro and GLM-4.7 score almost the same on the Noometry Index (42.5 vs 41.7), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.

Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.

Seed 2.0 Pro ByteDance Seed

42.5

Rank #97 Confirmed

GLM-4.7 Z.ai (Zhipu)

41.7

Rank #117 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Seed 2.0 Pro scores higher in 4 categories and GLM-4.7 in 4 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where GLM-4.7 leads 47.0 to 39.6.
  • GLM-4.7 is cheaper at $0.60 / $2.20 per million input/output tokens, against $0.50 / $3 for Seed 2.0 Pro.
  • Seed 2.0 Pro accepts more context: 256K tokens versus 205K.
  • GLM-4.7 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Seed 2.0 ProGLM-4.7
ProviderByteDance SeedZ.ai (Zhipu)
Noometry Index42.541.7
Released2026-02-142025-12-22
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window256K205K
Max output128K131K
Input $ / M tokens$0.50$0.60
Output $ / M tokens$3$2.20
Results tracked2036

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

Category by category

Coding Too close to call

Seed 2.0 Pro: 42.9 (#84), GLM-4.7: 43.6 (#74)

BenchmarkSeed 2.0 ProGLM-4.7
LMArena Coding14721454
LMArena WebDev—1435
SciCode—45.1%
ALE-Bench—399.48

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Seed 2.0 Pro: —, GLM-4.7: 26.4 (#96)

BenchmarkSeed 2.0 ProGLM-4.7
Terminal-Bench—33.4%
Vending-Bench 2—2,377

Reasoning Too close to call

Seed 2.0 Pro: 23.1 (#167), GLM-4.7: 23.7 (#161)

BenchmarkSeed 2.0 ProGLM-4.7
LMArena Hard Prompts14531443
SimpleBench—47.7%
NYT Connections (extended)28.4%—
CritPt—1.7%
Chess Puzzles—6%
Thematic Generalization57.1%—
Epoch Capabilities Index—143.53

Math GLM-4.7 leads

Seed 2.0 Pro: 36.5 (#110), GLM-4.7: 37.7 (#92)

BenchmarkSeed 2.0 ProGLM-4.7
LMArena Math14401423
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

Seed 2.0 Pro: 39.6 (#119), GLM-4.7: 47.0 (#74)

BenchmarkSeed 2.0 ProGLM-4.7
LMArena Expert14401424
GPQA Diamond—83.3%
SimpleQA Verified—32.2%
Vectara Hallucination Rate—11.7%

Multimodal Not comparable

Seed 2.0 Pro: 40.8 (#34), GLM-4.7: —

BenchmarkSeed 2.0 ProGLM-4.7
LMArena Vision1275—

Multilingual Seed 2.0 Pro leads

Seed 2.0 Pro: 54.8 (#37), GLM-4.7: 53.0 (#75)

BenchmarkSeed 2.0 ProGLM-4.7
LMArena Non-English14421417
LMArena Chinese14901495
LMArena French14701432
LMArena German14431426
LMArena Japanese14081439
LMArena Korean14121401
LMArena Russian14501423
LMArena Spanish14601433

Instruction Following Too close to call

Seed 2.0 Pro: 74.7 (#86), GLM-4.7: 74.6 (#90)

BenchmarkSeed 2.0 ProGLM-4.7
LMArena Instruction Following14141411

Long Context Too close to call

Seed 2.0 Pro: 43.6 (#85), GLM-4.7: 42.8 (#111)

BenchmarkSeed 2.0 ProGLM-4.7
LMArena Longer Query14281432
CL-bench—15.9%
CL-bench Life—10.9%

Writing & Preference Seed 2.0 Pro leads

Seed 2.0 Pro: 63.0 (#66), GLM-4.7: 61.1 (#89)

BenchmarkSeed 2.0 ProGLM-4.7
LMArena Text14481436
LMArena Creative Writing14061401
LMArena Multi-Turn14411446
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—1413

Frequently asked questions

Is Seed 2.0 Pro better than GLM-4.7?

Seed 2.0 Pro and GLM-4.7 score almost the same on the Noometry Index (42.5 vs 41.7), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.

Which is cheaper, Seed 2.0 Pro or GLM-4.7?

GLM-4.7 is cheaper. It lists at $0.60 per million input tokens and $2.20 per million output tokens; Seed 2.0 Pro lists at $0.50 and $3.

Is Seed 2.0 Pro or GLM-4.7 better for coding?

They score almost the same on coding (42.9 vs 43.6); test both on your own repository before choosing.

Which has the bigger context window?

Seed 2.0 Pro does, with 256K tokens against 205K.

How many benchmarks do Seed 2.0 Pro and GLM-4.7 share?

17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Seed 2.0 Pro has 20 scored results on Noometry and GLM-4.7 has 36.

Related comparisons

Go deeper