Model comparison

GLM-4.7-Flash vs Grok 4.5

Grok 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 55.0 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index. GLM-4.7-Flash costs 21× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified October 10, 2026. 20 shared benchmarks.

GLM-4.7-Flash Z.ai (Zhipu)

38.8

Rank #180 Confirmed

Grok 4.5 xAI

55.0

Rank #25 Confirmed

Summary

They share 20 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.7-Flash scores higher in 0 categories and Grok 4.5 in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok 4.5 leads 56.1 to 20.9.
The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 58.3% for GLM-4.7-Flash and 97.8% for Grok 4.5.
GLM-4.7-Flash is cheaper at $0.06 / $0.40 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $6 for Grok 4.5.
Grok 4.5 accepts more context: 500K tokens versus 200K.
GLM-4.7-Flash has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GLM-4.7-Flash and Grok 4.5 specifications
	GLM-4.7-Flash	Grok 4.5
Provider	Z.ai (Zhipu)	xAI
Noometry Index	38.8	55.0
Released	2026-01-19	2026-07-08
Weights	Open	Proprietary
Context window	200K	500K
Max output	131K	500K
Input $ / M tokens	$0.06	$2
Output $ / M tokens	$0.40	$6
Results tracked	21	52

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

Category by category

Coding Grok 4.5 leads

GLM-4.7-Flash: 40.6 (#135), Grok 4.5: 52.2 (#35)

Coding benchmarks
Benchmark	GLM-4.7-Flash	Grok 4.5
LMArena Coding	1383	1474
DeepSWE	—	53.8%
FrontierCode	—	42.4%
LMArena WebDev	—	1553
SciCode	—	54.1%
WeirdML	—	46.4%
ALE-Bench	—	1,309

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GLM-4.7-Flash: —, Grok 4.5: 44.4 (#17)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
Benchmark	GLM-4.7-Flash	Grok 4.5
APEX-Agents	—	56.2%
τ²-bench Banking	—	47.9%
PostTrainBench	—	23.4%
GBAEval	—	65.4%
GDP.pdf	—	14%
LMArena Search	—	1213
Vending-Bench 2	—	3,887

Reasoning Grok 4.5 leads

GLM-4.7-Flash: 20.9 (#229), Grok 4.5: 56.1 (#25)

Reasoning benchmarks
Benchmark	GLM-4.7-Flash	Grok 4.5
Chess Puzzles	0%	36%
LMArena Hard Prompts	1356	1462
ARC-AGI-2	—	52.6%
SimpleBench	—	70%
Kagi LLM Benchmark	—	83.5%
NYT Connections (extended)	—	79.9%
ARC-AGI-1	—	87.2%
CritPt	—	15.4%
DTBench	—	96.5%
LMCA	—	45.2%
Surface Evolver Bench	—	74.4%
Epoch Capabilities Index	—	153.92

Math Grok 4.5 leads

GLM-4.7-Flash: 36.1 (#173), Grok 4.5: 60.9 (#35)

Math benchmarks
Benchmark	GLM-4.7-Flash	Grok 4.5
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025	58.3%	97.8%
LMArena Math	1355	1459
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)	—	57.2%
FrontierMath Tier 4	—	24.4%
ProofBench	—	31%

Knowledge Grok 4.5 leads

GLM-4.7-Flash: 35.5 (#184), Grok 4.5: 62.3 (#24)

Knowledge benchmarks
Benchmark	GLM-4.7-Flash	Grok 4.5
GPQA Diamond	60.5%	93.4%
LMArena Expert	1357	1466
SimpleQA Verified	—	48.3%
Vectara Hallucination Rate	9.3%	—

Multimodal Not comparable

GLM-4.7-Flash: —, Grok 4.5: 37.6 (#72)

Multimodal benchmarks
Benchmark	GLM-4.7-Flash	Grok 4.5
LMArena Vision	—	1288
Blueprint-Bench 2	—	27.3%
Furniture Assembly	—	22.5%
LMArena Document	—	1452

Multilingual Grok 4.5 leads

GLM-4.7-Flash: 46.5 (#158), Grok 4.5: 54.4 (#42)

Multilingual benchmarks
Benchmark	GLM-4.7-Flash	Grok 4.5
LMArena Non-English	1330	1440
LMArena Chinese	1403	1496
LMArena French	1332	1456
LMArena German	1337	1446
LMArena Korean	1283	1404
LMArena Russian	1332	1448
LMArena Spanish	1350	1450
LMArena Japanese	—	1428

Instruction Following Grok 4.5 leads

GLM-4.7-Flash: 70.1 (#167), Grok 4.5: 76.0 (#48)

Instruction Following benchmarks
Benchmark	GLM-4.7-Flash	Grok 4.5
LMArena Instruction Following	1327	1446

Long Context Grok 4.5 leads

GLM-4.7-Flash: 40.9 (#148), Grok 4.5: 44.8 (#56)

Long Context benchmarks
Benchmark	GLM-4.7-Flash	Grok 4.5
LMArena Longer Query	1345	1463

Writing & Preference Grok 4.5 leads

GLM-4.7-Flash: 47.4 (#210), Grok 4.5: 65.8 (#42)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
Benchmark	GLM-4.7-Flash	Grok 4.5
LMArena Text	1351	1448
LMArena Creative Writing	1297	1442
EQ-Bench Creative Writing	1125	1579
LMArena Multi-Turn	1342	1456

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-4.7-Flash better than Grok 4.5?

Which is cheaper, GLM-4.7-Flash or Grok 4.5?

GLM-4.7-Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.06 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; Grok 4.5 lists at $2 and $6.

Is GLM-4.7-Flash or Grok 4.5 better for coding?

Grok 4.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 52.2 versus 40.6 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Grok 4.5 does, with 500K tokens against 200K.

How many benchmarks do GLM-4.7-Flash and Grok 4.5 share?

20 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.7-Flash has 21 scored results on Noometry and Grok 4.5 has 52.