Model comparison

GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3.6 Max Preview

Qwen3.6 Max Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.5 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index. GLM-4.7-Flash costs 20× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.6 Max Preview's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified October 10, 2026. 17 shared benchmarks.

GLM-4.7-Flash Z.ai (Zhipu)

38.8

Rank #180 Confirmed

Qwen3.6 Max Preview

Alibaba (Qwen)

51.5

Rank #43 Confirmed

Summary

They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.7-Flash scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.6 Max Preview in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads 57.6 to 35.5.
The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 58.3% for GLM-4.7-Flash and 91.1% for Qwen3.6 Max Preview.
GLM-4.7-Flash is cheaper at $0.06 / $0.40 per million input/output tokens, against $1.30 / $7.80 for Qwen3.6 Max Preview.
Qwen3.6 Max Preview accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 200K.
GLM-4.7-Flash has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GLM-4.7-Flash and Qwen3.6 Max Preview specifications
	GLM-4.7-Flash	Qwen3.6 Max Preview
Provider	Z.ai (Zhipu)	Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index	38.8	51.5
Released	2026-01-19	2026-04-20
Weights	Open	Proprietary
Context window	200K	262K
Max output	131K	66K
Input $ / M tokens	$0.06	$1.30
Output $ / M tokens	$0.40	$7.80
Results tracked	21	29

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads

GLM-4.7-Flash: 40.6 (#135), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 48.7 (#54)

Coding benchmarks
Benchmark	GLM-4.7-Flash	Qwen3.6 Max Preview
LMArena Coding	1383	1471
SWE-bench Verified	—	76.7%
LMArena WebDev	—	1482

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GLM-4.7-Flash: —, Qwen3.6 Max Preview: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
Benchmark	GLM-4.7-Flash	Qwen3.6 Max Preview
Vending-Bench 2	—	4,254

Reasoning Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads

GLM-4.7-Flash: 20.9 (#229), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 41.7 (#53)

Reasoning benchmarks
Benchmark	GLM-4.7-Flash	Qwen3.6 Max Preview
Chess Puzzles	0%	20%
LMArena Hard Prompts	1356	1457
SimpleBench	—	63%
NYT Connections (extended)	—	74.1%
Mystery Game Puzzles	—	19%
DTBench	—	87.2%
LMCA	—	42.5%
Epoch Capabilities Index	—	149.24

Math Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads

GLM-4.7-Flash: 36.1 (#173), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 54.1 (#46)

Math benchmarks
Benchmark	GLM-4.7-Flash	Qwen3.6 Max Preview
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025	58.3%	91.1%
LMArena Math	1355	1465
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)	—	23.1%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)	—	4.2%

Knowledge Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads

GLM-4.7-Flash: 35.5 (#184), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 57.6 (#39)

Knowledge benchmarks
Benchmark	GLM-4.7-Flash	Qwen3.6 Max Preview
GPQA Diamond	60.5%	87.4%
LMArena Expert	1357	1478
SimpleQA Verified	—	52%
Vectara Hallucination Rate	9.3%	—

Multilingual Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads

GLM-4.7-Flash: 46.5 (#158), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 54.2 (#48)

Multilingual benchmarks
Benchmark	GLM-4.7-Flash	Qwen3.6 Max Preview
LMArena Non-English	1330	1437
LMArena Chinese	1403	1487
LMArena French	1332	1449
LMArena Russian	1332	1445
LMArena Spanish	1350	1454
LMArena German	1337	—
LMArena Korean	1283	—

Instruction Following Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads

GLM-4.7-Flash: 70.1 (#167), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 75.7 (#55)

Instruction Following benchmarks
Benchmark	GLM-4.7-Flash	Qwen3.6 Max Preview
LMArena Instruction Following	1327	1438

Long Context Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads

GLM-4.7-Flash: 40.9 (#148), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 44.6 (#61)

Long Context benchmarks
Benchmark	GLM-4.7-Flash	Qwen3.6 Max Preview
LMArena Longer Query	1345	1457

Writing & Preference Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads

GLM-4.7-Flash: 47.4 (#210), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 63.8 (#60)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
Benchmark	GLM-4.7-Flash	Qwen3.6 Max Preview
LMArena Text	1351	1447
LMArena Creative Writing	1297	1435
LMArena Multi-Turn	1342	1456
EQ-Bench Creative Writing	1125	—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-4.7-Flash better than Qwen3.6 Max Preview?

Which is cheaper, GLM-4.7-Flash or Qwen3.6 Max Preview?

GLM-4.7-Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.06 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; Qwen3.6 Max Preview lists at $1.30 and $7.80.

Is GLM-4.7-Flash or Qwen3.6 Max Preview better for coding?

Qwen3.6 Max Preview scores higher on coding benchmarks: 48.7 versus 40.6 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.6 Max Preview does, with 262K tokens against 200K.

How many benchmarks do GLM-4.7-Flash and Qwen3.6 Max Preview share?

17 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.7-Flash has 21 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 Max Preview has 29.