Model comparison
GLM-4.7-Flash vs phi-3-medium 14B
GLM-4.7-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.8 to 29.7 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.
MicrosoftSummary
- They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. GLM-4.7-Flash scores higher in 3 categories and phi-3-medium 14B in 0 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where GLM-4.7-Flash leads 35.5 to 9.1.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 60.5% for GLM-4.7-Flash and 27.6% for phi-3-medium 14B.
Side by side
| GLM-4.7-Flash | phi-3-medium 14B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | Microsoft |
| Noometry Index | 38.8 | 29.7 |
| Released | 2026-01-19 | 2024-04-23 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 200K | — |
| Max output | 131K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.06 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.40 | — |
| Results tracked | 21 | 13 |
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), phi-3-medium 14B: 36.8 (#201)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 37.6% |
| LMArena Coding | 1383 | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 48.7% |
Reasoning Not comparable
GLM-4.7-Flash: 20.9 (#229), phi-3-medium 14B: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1356 | — |
| Adversarial NLI | — | 55.8% |
| BIG-Bench Hard | — | 81.4% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 121.23 |
| HellaSwag | — | 82.4% |
| WinoGrande | — | 81.5% |
Math GLM-4.7-Flash leads
GLM-4.7-Flash: 36.1 (#173), phi-3-medium 14B: 27.3 (#250)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 58.3% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1355 | — |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 17.6% |
Knowledge GLM-4.7-Flash leads
GLM-4.7-Flash: 35.5 (#184), phi-3-medium 14B: 9.1 (#306)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 60.5% | 27.6% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 9.3% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1357 | — |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 91.6% |
| MMLU | — | 78% |
| OpenBookQA | — | 87.4% |
| TriviaQA | — | 73.9% |
Multilingual Not comparable
GLM-4.7-Flash: 46.5 (#158), phi-3-medium 14B: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1330 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1403 | — |
| LMArena French | 1332 | — |
| LMArena German | 1337 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1283 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1332 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1350 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
GLM-4.7-Flash: 70.1 (#167), phi-3-medium 14B: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1327 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
GLM-4.7-Flash: 40.9 (#148), phi-3-medium 14B: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1345 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
GLM-4.7-Flash: 47.4 (#210), phi-3-medium 14B: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1351 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1297 | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1125 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1342 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is GLM-4.7-Flash better than phi-3-medium 14B?
GLM-4.7-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.8 to 29.7 on the Noometry Index.
Is GLM-4.7-Flash or phi-3-medium 14B better for coding?
GLM-4.7-Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.6 versus 36.8 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do GLM-4.7-Flash and phi-3-medium 14B share?
1 benchmark has published results for both models. GLM-4.7-Flash has 21 scored results on Noometry and phi-3-medium 14B has 13.