Model comparison
GLM-4.7 vs GPT-6 Luna
GPT-6 Luna is the stronger model overall, scoring 53.3 to 42.0 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 27 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 27 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.7 scores higher in 3 categories and GPT-6 Luna in 6 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where GPT-6 Luna leads 76.1 to 38.6.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is ProofBench: 6% for GLM-4.7 and 64% for GPT-6 Luna.
- GPT-6 Luna is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.50 per million input/output tokens, against $0.60 / $2.20 for GLM-4.7.
- GPT-6 Luna accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 205K.
- GLM-4.7 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| GLM-4.7 | GPT-6 Luna | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | OpenAI |
| Noometry Index | 42.0 | 53.3 |
| Released | 2025-12-22 | 2026-09-22 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 205K | 1.05M |
| Max output | 131K | 128K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.60 | $0.10 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $2.20 | $0.50 |
| Results tracked | 36 | 42 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GPT-6 Luna leads
GLM-4.7: 44.0 (#79), GPT-6 Luna: 55.5 (#25)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7 | GPT-6 Luna |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1435 | 1581 |
| SciCode | 45.1% | 54.6% |
| LMArena Coding | 1454 | 1439 |
| ALE-Bench | 399.48 | 1,577 |
| DeepSWE | — | 66.6% |
| FrontierCode | — | 42.4% |
Agentic & Tool Use GPT-6 Luna leads
GLM-4.7: 26.5 (#103), GPT-6 Luna: 33.3 (#54)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7 | GPT-6 Luna |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 33.4% | — |
| APEX-Agents | — | 44.3% |
| GDP.pdf | — | 23% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 2,377 | — |
Reasoning GPT-6 Luna leads
GLM-4.7: 24.3 (#164), GPT-6 Luna: 48.2 (#41)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7 | GPT-6 Luna |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 1.7% | 19.4% |
| Chess Puzzles | 6% | 31% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1443 | 1411 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 143.51 | 156.28 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 59.3% |
| SimpleBench | 47.7% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 68.7% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 86.7% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 7% |
| DTBench | — | 90.1% |
| LMCA | — | 44.5% |
Math GPT-6 Luna leads
GLM-4.7: 38.6 (#135), GPT-6 Luna: 76.1 (#15)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7 | GPT-6 Luna |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 83.3% | 98.9% |
| ProofBench | 6% | 64% |
| LMArena Math | 1423 | 1416 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 78.9% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 56.1% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 2.4% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 0% | — |
Knowledge GPT-6 Luna leads
GLM-4.7: 47.0 (#80), GPT-6 Luna: 57.0 (#41)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7 | GPT-6 Luna |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 83.3% | 90.5% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 32.2% | 41.4% |
| LMArena Expert | 1424 | 1444 |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 11.7% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
GLM-4.7: —, GPT-6 Luna: 42.4 (#30)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7 | GPT-6 Luna |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1217 |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | — | 31.2% |
| Furniture Assembly | — | 44.2% |
Multilingual GLM-4.7 leads
GLM-4.7: 52.8 (#79), GPT-6 Luna: 50.5 (#117)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7 | GPT-6 Luna |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1417 | 1386 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1495 | 1433 |
| LMArena French | 1432 | 1420 |
| LMArena German | 1424 | 1369 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1439 | 1369 |
| LMArena Korean | 1399 | 1360 |
| LMArena Russian | 1423 | 1394 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1434 | 1393 |
Instruction Following Too close to call
GLM-4.7: 74.4 (#95), GPT-6 Luna: 74.3 (#99)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7 | GPT-6 Luna |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1411 | 1409 |
Long Context Too close to call
GLM-4.7: 42.8 (#116), GPT-6 Luna: 43.0 (#111)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7 | GPT-6 Luna |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1432 | 1409 |
| CL-bench | 15.9% | — |
| CL-bench Life | 10.9% | — |
Writing & Preference GLM-4.7 leads
GLM-4.7: 60.9 (#93), GPT-6 Luna: 58.3 (#119)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7 | GPT-6 Luna |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1435 | 1391 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1401 | 1363 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1446 | 1396 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1413 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is GLM-4.7 better than GPT-6 Luna?
GPT-6 Luna is the stronger model overall, scoring 53.3 to 42.0 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, GLM-4.7 or GPT-6 Luna?
GPT-6 Luna is cheaper. It lists at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.50 per million output tokens; GLM-4.7 lists at $0.60 and $2.20.
Is GLM-4.7 or GPT-6 Luna better for coding?
GPT-6 Luna scores higher on coding benchmarks: 55.5 versus 44.0 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
GPT-6 Luna does, with 1.05M tokens against 205K.
How many benchmarks do GLM-4.7 and GPT-6 Luna share?
27 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.7 has 36 scored results on Noometry and GPT-6 Luna has 42.