Noometry

Model comparison

GLM-4.7 vs GPT-4.1 nano

GLM-4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.7 to 27.7 on the Noometry Index. GPT-4.1 nano costs 5.7× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-4.7's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 22 shared benchmarks.

GLM-4.7 Z.ai (Zhipu)

41.7

Rank #117 Confirmed

GPT-4.1 nano OpenAI

27.7

Rank #322 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 22 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.7 scores higher in 9 categories and GPT-4.1 nano in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where GLM-4.7 leads 47.0 to 21.8.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 83.3% for GLM-4.7 and 28.9% for GPT-4.1 nano.
  • GPT-4.1 nano is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.40 per million input/output tokens, against $0.60 / $2.20 for GLM-4.7.
  • GPT-4.1 nano accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 205K.
  • GLM-4.7 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GLM-4.7GPT-4.1 nano
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)OpenAI
Noometry Index41.727.7
Released2025-12-222025-04-14
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window205K1.05M
Max output131K33K
Input $ / M tokens$0.60$0.10
Output $ / M tokens$2.20$0.40
Results tracked3638

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

Category by category

Coding GLM-4.7 leads

GLM-4.7: 43.6 (#74), GPT-4.1 nano: 23.8 (#325)

BenchmarkGLM-4.7GPT-4.1 nano
SciCode45.1%25.9%
LMArena Coding14541306
Aider Polyglot—8.9%
LMArena WebDev1435—
WeirdML—19%
ALE-Bench399.48—

Agentic & Tool Use Too close to call

GLM-4.7: 26.4 (#96), GPT-4.1 nano: 26.3 (#98)

BenchmarkGLM-4.7GPT-4.1 nano
Terminal-Bench33.4%—
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—33%
Vending-Bench 22,377—

Reasoning GLM-4.7 leads

GLM-4.7: 23.7 (#161), GPT-4.1 nano: 8.6 (#344)

BenchmarkGLM-4.7GPT-4.1 nano
CritPt1.7%0%
LMArena Hard Prompts14431286
Epoch Capabilities Index143.53129.62
ARC-AGI-2—0%
SimpleBench47.7%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark—33.3%
ARC-AGI-1—0%
Chess Puzzles6%—
DTBench—52.5%
LMCA—5.5%

Math GLM-4.7 leads

GLM-4.7: 37.7 (#92), GPT-4.1 nano: 25.5 (#246)

BenchmarkGLM-4.7GPT-4.1 nano
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202583.3%28.9%
LMArena Math14231274
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)2.4%1%
ProofBench6%—
Omni-MATH—36.7%
MATH Level 5—70%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)0%—

Knowledge GLM-4.7 leads

GLM-4.7: 47.0 (#74), GPT-4.1 nano: 21.8 (#268)

BenchmarkGLM-4.7GPT-4.1 nano
GPQA Diamond83.3%48.9%
SimpleQA Verified32.2%6%
LMArena Expert14241272
MMLU-Pro—55%
Vectara Hallucination Rate11.7%—
GPQA (HELM)—50.7%

Multimodal Not comparable

GLM-4.7: —, GPT-4.1 nano: 28.6 (#108)

BenchmarkGLM-4.7GPT-4.1 nano
LMArena Vision—1063

Multilingual GLM-4.7 leads

GLM-4.7: 53.0 (#75), GPT-4.1 nano: 41.8 (#200)

BenchmarkGLM-4.7GPT-4.1 nano
LMArena Non-English14171260
LMArena Chinese14951270
LMArena German14261288
LMArena Japanese14391199
LMArena Russian14231261
LMArena French1432—
LMArena Korean1401—
LMArena Spanish1433—

Instruction Following GLM-4.7 leads

GLM-4.7: 74.6 (#90), GPT-4.1 nano: 68.0 (#188)

BenchmarkGLM-4.7GPT-4.1 nano
LMArena Instruction Following14111267
IFEval—84.3%

Long Context GLM-4.7 leads

GLM-4.7: 42.8 (#111), GPT-4.1 nano: 23.7 (#291)

BenchmarkGLM-4.7GPT-4.1 nano
LMArena Longer Query14321283
Fiction.LiveBench—25%
CL-bench15.9%—
CL-bench Life10.9%—

Writing & Preference GLM-4.7 leads

GLM-4.7: 61.1 (#89), GPT-4.1 nano: 40.7 (#238)

BenchmarkGLM-4.7GPT-4.1 nano
LMArena Text14361285
LMArena Creative Writing14011260
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1413946
LMArena Multi-Turn14461277
WildBench—81.2%

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-4.7 better than GPT-4.1 nano?

GLM-4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.7 to 27.7 on the Noometry Index. GPT-4.1 nano costs 5.7× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-4.7's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, GLM-4.7 or GPT-4.1 nano?

GPT-4.1 nano is cheaper. It lists at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; GLM-4.7 lists at $0.60 and $2.20.

Is GLM-4.7 or GPT-4.1 nano better for coding?

GLM-4.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 43.6 versus 23.8 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

GPT-4.1 nano does, with 1.05M tokens against 205K.

How many benchmarks do GLM-4.7 and GPT-4.1 nano share?

22 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.7 has 36 scored results on Noometry and GPT-4.1 nano has 38.

Related comparisons

Go deeper