Model comparison
Falcon-180B vs GLM-4.7-Flash
GLM-4.7-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.8 to 32.2 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 6 shared benchmarks.
Technology Innovation InstituteSummary
- They share 6 benchmarks with published results for both. Falcon-180B scores higher in 0 categories and GLM-4.7-Flash in 4 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in multilingual, where GLM-4.7-Flash leads 46.5 to 25.2.
Side by side
| Falcon-180B | GLM-4.7-Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Technology Innovation Institute | Z.ai (Zhipu) |
| Noometry Index | 32.2 | 38.8 |
| Released | 2023-09-06 | 2026-01-19 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | 200K |
| Max output | — | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.06 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $0.40 |
| Results tracked | 16 | 21 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
Falcon-180B: —, GLM-4.7-Flash: 40.6 (#135)
| Benchmark | Falcon-180B | GLM-4.7-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | — | 1383 |
Reasoning GLM-4.7-Flash leads
Falcon-180B: 19.1 (#269), GLM-4.7-Flash: 20.9 (#229)
| Benchmark | Falcon-180B | GLM-4.7-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1007 | 1356 |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 0% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 112.13 | — |
| HellaSwag | 89% | — |
| LAMBADA | 79.8% | — |
| PIQA | 84.9% | — |
| WinoGrande | 87.1% | — |
Math Not comparable
Falcon-180B: —, GLM-4.7-Flash: 36.1 (#173)
| Benchmark | Falcon-180B | GLM-4.7-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 58.3% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1355 |
| GSM8K | 54.4% | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
Falcon-180B: —, GLM-4.7-Flash: 35.5 (#184)
| Benchmark | Falcon-180B | GLM-4.7-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 60.5% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 9.3% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1357 |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 67.8% | — |
| BoolQ | 89% | — |
| MMLU | 70.6% | — |
| OpenBookQA | 64.2% | — |
Multilingual GLM-4.7-Flash leads
Falcon-180B: 25.2 (#286), GLM-4.7-Flash: 46.5 (#158)
| Benchmark | Falcon-180B | GLM-4.7-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1000 | 1330 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1403 |
| LMArena French | — | 1332 |
| LMArena German | — | 1337 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1283 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1332 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1350 |
Instruction Following GLM-4.7-Flash leads
Falcon-180B: 53.4 (#286), GLM-4.7-Flash: 70.1 (#167)
| Benchmark | Falcon-180B | GLM-4.7-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1047 | 1327 |
Long Context Not comparable
Falcon-180B: —, GLM-4.7-Flash: 40.9 (#148)
| Benchmark | Falcon-180B | GLM-4.7-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1345 |
Writing & Preference GLM-4.7-Flash leads
Falcon-180B: 29.1 (#295), GLM-4.7-Flash: 47.4 (#210)
| Benchmark | Falcon-180B | GLM-4.7-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1054 | 1351 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1089 | 1297 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1013 | 1342 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1125 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Falcon-180B better than GLM-4.7-Flash?
GLM-4.7-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.8 to 32.2 on the Noometry Index.
How many benchmarks do Falcon-180B and GLM-4.7-Flash share?
6 benchmarks have published results for both models. Falcon-180B has 16 scored results on Noometry and GLM-4.7-Flash has 21.