Model comparison
GLM-4.7-Flash vs Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.2 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index. GLM-4.7-Flash costs 11× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 16 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 16 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.7-Flash scores higher in 0 categories and Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads 43.9 to 20.9.
- GLM-4.7-Flash is cheaper at $0.06 / $0.40 per million input/output tokens, against $1.25 / $2.50 for Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent.
- Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 200K.
- GLM-4.7-Flash has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| GLM-4.7-Flash | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | xAI |
| Noometry Index | 38.8 | 46.2 |
| Released | 2026-01-19 | 2026-03-09 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 200K | 1M |
| Max output | 131K | 30K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.06 | $1.25 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.40 | $2.50 |
| Results tracked | 21 | 20 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads
GLM-4.7-Flash: 40.6 (#135), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 43.0 (#92)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1383 | 1457 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
GLM-4.7-Flash: —, Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Search | — | 1204 |
Reasoning Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads
GLM-4.7-Flash: 20.9 (#229), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 43.9 (#48)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1356 | 1448 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 89.6% |
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | — |
Math Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads
GLM-4.7-Flash: 36.1 (#173), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 39.4 (#104)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1355 | 1442 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 58.3% | — |
Knowledge Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads
GLM-4.7-Flash: 35.5 (#184), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 40.4 (#119)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1357 | 1445 |
| GPQA Diamond | 60.5% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 9.3% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
GLM-4.7-Flash: —, Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 40.5 (#48)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1259 |
Multilingual Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads
GLM-4.7-Flash: 46.5 (#158), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 54.4 (#43)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1330 | 1440 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1403 | 1475 |
| LMArena French | 1332 | 1466 |
| LMArena German | 1337 | 1456 |
| LMArena Korean | 1283 | 1416 |
| LMArena Russian | 1332 | 1457 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1350 | 1447 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1405 |
Instruction Following Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads
GLM-4.7-Flash: 70.1 (#167), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 74.8 (#84)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1327 | 1420 |
Long Context Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads
GLM-4.7-Flash: 40.9 (#148), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 43.7 (#88)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1345 | 1431 |
Writing & Preference Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads
GLM-4.7-Flash: 47.4 (#210), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 64.0 (#59)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1351 | 1450 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1297 | 1436 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1342 | 1452 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1125 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is GLM-4.7-Flash better than Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent?
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.2 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index. GLM-4.7-Flash costs 11× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, GLM-4.7-Flash or Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent?
GLM-4.7-Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.06 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent lists at $1.25 and $2.50.
Is GLM-4.7-Flash or Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent better for coding?
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent scores higher on coding benchmarks: 43.0 versus 40.6 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent does, with 1M tokens against 200K.
How many benchmarks do GLM-4.7-Flash and Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent share?
16 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.7-Flash has 21 scored results on Noometry and Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent has 20.