Model comparison
GLM-4.7-Flash vs Mercury 2
GLM-4.7-Flash and Mercury 2 score almost the same on the Noometry Index (38.8 vs 39.1), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.7-Flash scores higher in 2 categories and Mercury 2 in 5 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in coding, where GLM-4.7-Flash leads 40.6 to 33.5.
- GLM-4.7-Flash is cheaper at $0.06 / $0.40 per million input/output tokens, against $0.25 / $0.75 for Mercury 2.
- GLM-4.7-Flash accepts more context: 200K tokens versus 128K.
- GLM-4.7-Flash has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| GLM-4.7-Flash | Mercury 2 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | Inception |
| Noometry Index | 38.8 | 39.1 |
| Released | 2026-01-19 | 2026-02-20 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 200K | 128K |
| Max output | 131K | 50K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.06 | $0.25 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.40 | $0.75 |
| Results tracked | 21 | 17 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GLM-4.7-Flash leads
GLM-4.7-Flash: 40.6 (#135), Mercury 2: 33.5 (#255)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Mercury 2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1383 | 1391 |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1171 |
| SciCode | — | 38.7% |
| WeirdML | — | 43.2% |
| ALE-Bench | — | 785.58 |
Reasoning Mercury 2 leads
GLM-4.7-Flash: 20.9 (#229), Mercury 2: 23.8 (#170)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Mercury 2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1356 | 1362 |
| CritPt | — | 0.8% |
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | — |
Math Not comparable
GLM-4.7-Flash: 36.1 (#173), Mercury 2: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Mercury 2 |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 58.3% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1355 | — |
Knowledge Too close to call
GLM-4.7-Flash: 35.5 (#184), Mercury 2: 36.2 (#172)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Mercury 2 |
|---|---|---|
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 9.3% | 12.3% |
| LMArena Expert | 1357 | 1358 |
| GPQA Diamond | 60.5% | — |
Multilingual Too close to call
GLM-4.7-Flash: 46.5 (#158), Mercury 2: 46.6 (#157)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Mercury 2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1330 | 1331 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1403 | 1417 |
| LMArena Russian | 1332 | 1304 |
| LMArena French | 1332 | — |
| LMArena German | 1337 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1283 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1350 | — |
Instruction Following Too close to call
GLM-4.7-Flash: 70.1 (#167), Mercury 2: 70.2 (#165)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Mercury 2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1327 | 1329 |
Long Context Too close to call
GLM-4.7-Flash: 40.9 (#148), Mercury 2: 40.5 (#154)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Mercury 2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1345 | 1330 |
Writing & Preference Mercury 2 leads
GLM-4.7-Flash: 47.4 (#210), Mercury 2: 53.8 (#155)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Mercury 2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1351 | 1355 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1297 | 1289 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1342 | 1358 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1125 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is GLM-4.7-Flash better than Mercury 2?
GLM-4.7-Flash and Mercury 2 score almost the same on the Noometry Index (38.8 vs 39.1), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Which is cheaper, GLM-4.7-Flash or Mercury 2?
GLM-4.7-Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.06 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; Mercury 2 lists at $0.25 and $0.75.
Is GLM-4.7-Flash or Mercury 2 better for coding?
GLM-4.7-Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.6 versus 33.5 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
GLM-4.7-Flash does, with 200K tokens against 128K.
How many benchmarks do GLM-4.7-Flash and Mercury 2 share?
12 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.7-Flash has 21 scored results on Noometry and Mercury 2 has 17.