Noometry

Model comparison

GLM-4.7 vs GPT-5.2 Codex

GLM-4.7 and GPT-5.2 Codex score almost the same on the Noometry Index (42.0 vs 42.6), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.

Last verified . 3 shared benchmarks.

GLM-4.7 Z.ai (Zhipu)

42.0

Rank #124 Confirmed

GPT-5.2 Codex OpenAI

42.6

Rank #111 Reported

Summary

  • They share 3 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.7 scores higher in 0 categories and GPT-5.2 Codex in 2 categories; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in agentic & tool use, where GPT-5.2 Codex leads 41.0 to 26.5.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is Terminal-Bench: 33.4% for GLM-4.7 and 66.5% for GPT-5.2 Codex.
  • GLM-4.7 is cheaper at $0.60 / $2.20 per million input/output tokens, against $1.75 / $14 for GPT-5.2 Codex.
  • GPT-5.2 Codex accepts more context: 400K tokens versus 205K.
  • GLM-4.7 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GLM-4.7GPT-5.2 Codex
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)OpenAI
Noometry Index42.042.6
Released2025-12-222025-12-18
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window205K400K
Max output131K128K
Input $ / M tokens$0.60$1.75
Output $ / M tokens$2.20$14
Results tracked365

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

Category by category

Coding GPT-5.2 Codex leads

GLM-4.7: 44.0 (#79), GPT-5.2 Codex: 45.5 (#71)

BenchmarkGLM-4.7GPT-5.2 Codex
LMArena WebDev14351339
ALE-Bench399.481,300
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)—72.8%
SWE-bench Multilingual—66.3%
SciCode45.1%—
LMArena Coding1454—

Agentic & Tool Use GPT-5.2 Codex leads

GLM-4.7: 26.5 (#103), GPT-5.2 Codex: 41.0 (#22)

BenchmarkGLM-4.7GPT-5.2 Codex
Terminal-Bench33.4%66.5%
Vending-Bench 22,377—

Reasoning Not comparable

GLM-4.7: 24.3 (#164), GPT-5.2 Codex: —

BenchmarkGLM-4.7GPT-5.2 Codex
SimpleBench47.7%—
CritPt1.7%—
Chess Puzzles6%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1443—
Epoch Capabilities Index143.51—

Math Not comparable

GLM-4.7: 38.6 (#135), GPT-5.2 Codex: —

BenchmarkGLM-4.7GPT-5.2 Codex
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202583.3%—
ProofBench6%—
LMArena Math1423—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)2.4%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)0%—

Knowledge Not comparable

GLM-4.7: 47.0 (#80), GPT-5.2 Codex: —

BenchmarkGLM-4.7GPT-5.2 Codex
GPQA Diamond83.3%—
SimpleQA Verified32.2%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate11.7%—
LMArena Expert1424—

Multilingual Not comparable

GLM-4.7: 52.8 (#79), GPT-5.2 Codex: —

BenchmarkGLM-4.7GPT-5.2 Codex
LMArena Non-English1417—
LMArena Chinese1495—
LMArena French1432—
LMArena German1424—
LMArena Japanese1439—
LMArena Korean1399—
LMArena Russian1423—
LMArena Spanish1434—

Instruction Following Not comparable

GLM-4.7: 74.4 (#95), GPT-5.2 Codex: —

BenchmarkGLM-4.7GPT-5.2 Codex
LMArena Instruction Following1411—

Long Context Not comparable

GLM-4.7: 42.8 (#116), GPT-5.2 Codex: —

BenchmarkGLM-4.7GPT-5.2 Codex
CL-bench15.9%—
CL-bench Life10.9%—
LMArena Longer Query1432—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

GLM-4.7: 60.9 (#93), GPT-5.2 Codex: —

BenchmarkGLM-4.7GPT-5.2 Codex
LMArena Text1435—
LMArena Creative Writing1401—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1413—
LMArena Multi-Turn1446—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-4.7 better than GPT-5.2 Codex?

GLM-4.7 and GPT-5.2 Codex score almost the same on the Noometry Index (42.0 vs 42.6), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.

Which is cheaper, GLM-4.7 or GPT-5.2 Codex?

GLM-4.7 is cheaper. It lists at $0.60 per million input tokens and $2.20 per million output tokens; GPT-5.2 Codex lists at $1.75 and $14.

Is GLM-4.7 or GPT-5.2 Codex better for coding?

GPT-5.2 Codex scores higher on coding benchmarks: 45.5 versus 44.0 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

GPT-5.2 Codex does, with 400K tokens against 205K.

How many benchmarks do GLM-4.7 and GPT-5.2 Codex share?

3 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.7 has 36 scored results on Noometry and GPT-5.2 Codex has 5.

Related comparisons

Go deeper