Model comparison

Falcon-180B vs GLM-4.7

GLM-4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.7 to 31.8 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 7 shared benchmarks.

GLM-4.7 Z.ai (Zhipu)

41.7

Rank #117 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 7 benchmarks with published results for both. Falcon-180B scores higher in 0 categories and GLM-4.7 in 4 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where GLM-4.7 leads 61.1 to 29.3.

Side by side

Falcon-180B and GLM-4.7 specifications
Falcon-180BGLM-4.7
ProviderTechnology Innovation InstituteZ.ai (Zhipu)
Noometry Index31.841.7
Released2023-09-062025-12-22
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window—205K
Max output—131K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.60
Output $ / M tokens—$2.20
Results tracked1636

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

Falcon-180B: —, GLM-4.7: 43.6 (#74)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkFalcon-180BGLM-4.7
LMArena WebDev—1435
SciCode—45.1%
LMArena Coding—1454
ALE-Bench—399.48

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Falcon-180B: —, GLM-4.7: 26.4 (#96)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkFalcon-180BGLM-4.7
Terminal-Bench—33.4%
Vending-Bench 2—2,377

Reasoning GLM-4.7 leads

Falcon-180B: 18.3 (#266), GLM-4.7: 23.7 (#161)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkFalcon-180BGLM-4.7
LMArena Hard Prompts10071443
Epoch Capabilities Index111.89143.53
SimpleBench—47.7%
CritPt—1.7%
Chess Puzzles—6%
HellaSwag89%—
LAMBADA79.8%—
PIQA84.9%—
WinoGrande87.1%—

Math Not comparable

Falcon-180B: —, GLM-4.7: 37.7 (#92)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkFalcon-180BGLM-4.7
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—83.3%
ProofBench—6%
LMArena Math—1423
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)—2.4%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)—0%
GSM8K54.4%—

Knowledge Not comparable

Falcon-180B: —, GLM-4.7: 47.0 (#74)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkFalcon-180BGLM-4.7
GPQA Diamond—83.3%
SimpleQA Verified—32.2%
Vectara Hallucination Rate—11.7%
LMArena Expert—1424
ARC (AI2) Challenge67.8%—
BoolQ89%—
MMLU70.6%—
OpenBookQA64.2%—

Multilingual GLM-4.7 leads

Falcon-180B: 25.3 (#281), GLM-4.7: 53.0 (#75)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkFalcon-180BGLM-4.7
LMArena Non-English10001417
LMArena Chinese—1495
LMArena French—1432
LMArena German—1426
LMArena Japanese—1439
LMArena Korean—1401
LMArena Russian—1423
LMArena Spanish—1433

Instruction Following GLM-4.7 leads

Falcon-180B: 53.6 (#281), GLM-4.7: 74.6 (#90)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkFalcon-180BGLM-4.7
LMArena Instruction Following10471411

Long Context Not comparable

Falcon-180B: —, GLM-4.7: 42.8 (#111)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkFalcon-180BGLM-4.7
CL-bench—15.9%
CL-bench Life—10.9%
LMArena Longer Query—1432

Writing & Preference GLM-4.7 leads

Falcon-180B: 29.3 (#290), GLM-4.7: 61.1 (#89)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkFalcon-180BGLM-4.7
LMArena Text10541436
LMArena Creative Writing10891401
LMArena Multi-Turn10131446
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—1413

Frequently asked questions

Is Falcon-180B better than GLM-4.7?

GLM-4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.7 to 31.8 on the Noometry Index.

How many benchmarks do Falcon-180B and GLM-4.7 share?

7 benchmarks have published results for both models. Falcon-180B has 16 scored results on Noometry and GLM-4.7 has 36.

Related comparisons

Go deeper