Model comparison
GLM-4.7-Flash vs Grok 4.3
Grok 4.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.8 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index. GLM-4.7-Flash costs 11× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.3's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 19 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 19 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.7-Flash scores higher in 0 categories and Grok 4.3 in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Grok 4.3 leads 52.5 to 35.5.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 58.3% for GLM-4.7-Flash and 93.3% for Grok 4.3.
- GLM-4.7-Flash is cheaper at $0.06 / $0.40 per million input/output tokens, against $1.25 / $2.50 for Grok 4.3.
- Grok 4.3 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 4.3 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | xAI |
| Noometry Index | 38.8 | 43.8 |
| Released | 2026-01-19 | 2026-04-17 |
| 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 | 40 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Grok 4.3 leads
GLM-4.7-Flash: 40.6 (#135), Grok 4.3: 41.6 (#121)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Grok 4.3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1383 | 1415 |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1357 |
| SciCode | — | 47.3% |
| WeirdML | — | 49.9% |
| ALE-Bench | — | 944.17 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
GLM-4.7-Flash: —, Grok 4.3: 27.7 (#99)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Grok 4.3 |
|---|---|---|
| GDP.pdf | — | 8% |
| LMArena Search | — | 1165 |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 35.26 |
Reasoning Grok 4.3 leads
GLM-4.7-Flash: 20.9 (#229), Grok 4.3: 35.9 (#68)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Grok 4.3 |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | 25% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1356 | 1396 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 55.2% |
| CritPt | — | 8% |
| DTBench | — | 90.7% |
| LMCA | — | 38.3% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 149.16 |
| ForecastBench | — | 60.3 |
Math Grok 4.3 leads
GLM-4.7-Flash: 36.1 (#173), Grok 4.3: 46.0 (#74)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Grok 4.3 |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 58.3% | 93.3% |
| LMArena Math | 1355 | 1388 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 42.8% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 14.6% |
| ProofBench | — | 11% |
Knowledge Grok 4.3 leads
GLM-4.7-Flash: 35.5 (#184), Grok 4.3: 52.5 (#62)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Grok 4.3 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 60.5% | 88.8% |
| LMArena Expert | 1357 | 1385 |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 33.2% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 9.3% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
GLM-4.7-Flash: —, Grok 4.3: 31.6 (#104)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Grok 4.3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1229 |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | — | 0% |
Multilingual Grok 4.3 leads
GLM-4.7-Flash: 46.5 (#158), Grok 4.3: 50.5 (#120)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Grok 4.3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1330 | 1385 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1403 | 1422 |
| LMArena French | 1332 | 1412 |
| LMArena German | 1337 | 1395 |
| LMArena Korean | 1283 | 1356 |
| LMArena Russian | 1332 | 1399 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1350 | 1398 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1379 |
Instruction Following Grok 4.3 leads
GLM-4.7-Flash: 70.1 (#167), Grok 4.3: 72.1 (#140)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Grok 4.3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1327 | 1366 |
Long Context Grok 4.3 leads
GLM-4.7-Flash: 40.9 (#148), Grok 4.3: 42.5 (#123)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Grok 4.3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1345 | 1393 |
Writing & Preference Grok 4.3 leads
GLM-4.7-Flash: 47.4 (#210), Grok 4.3: 58.5 (#118)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Grok 4.3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1351 | 1397 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1297 | 1380 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1342 | 1406 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1125 | — |
| EQ-Bench 4 | — | 1075 |
Frequently asked questions
Is GLM-4.7-Flash better than Grok 4.3?
Grok 4.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.8 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index. GLM-4.7-Flash costs 11× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.3's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, GLM-4.7-Flash or Grok 4.3?
GLM-4.7-Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.06 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; Grok 4.3 lists at $1.25 and $2.50.
Is GLM-4.7-Flash or Grok 4.3 better for coding?
Grok 4.3 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.6 versus 40.6 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Grok 4.3 does, with 1M tokens against 200K.
How many benchmarks do GLM-4.7-Flash and Grok 4.3 share?
19 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.7-Flash has 21 scored results on Noometry and Grok 4.3 has 40.