Model comparison

GLM-4.7 vs Granite 4.2 3b

GLM-4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.0 to 39.4 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 11 shared benchmarks.

GLM-4.7 Z.ai (Zhipu)

42.0

Rank #124 Confirmed

Granite 4.2 3b IBM

39.4

Rank #169 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.7 scores higher in 6 categories and Granite 4.2 3b in 1 category; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where GLM-4.7 leads 60.9 to 47.2.

Side by side

GLM-4.7 and Granite 4.2 3b specifications
GLM-4.7Granite 4.2 3b
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)IBM
Noometry Index42.039.4
Released2025-12-22—
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window205K—
Max output131K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.60—
Output $ / M tokens$2.20—
Results tracked3611

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

Category by category

Coding GLM-4.7 leads

GLM-4.7: 44.0 (#79), Granite 4.2 3b: 40.0 (#151)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Granite 4.2 3b
LMArena Coding14541361
LMArena WebDev1435—
SciCode45.1%—
ALE-Bench399.48—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GLM-4.7: 26.5 (#103), Granite 4.2 3b: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Granite 4.2 3b
Terminal-Bench33.4%—
Vending-Bench 22,377—

Reasoning Granite 4.2 3b leads

GLM-4.7: 24.3 (#164), Granite 4.2 3b: 26.0 (#138)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Granite 4.2 3b
LMArena Hard Prompts14431306
SimpleBench47.7%—
CritPt1.7%—
Chess Puzzles6%—
Epoch Capabilities Index143.51—

Math Not comparable

GLM-4.7: 38.6 (#135), Granite 4.2 3b: —

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Granite 4.2 3b
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202583.3%—
ProofBench6%—
LMArena Math1423—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)2.4%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)0%—

Knowledge GLM-4.7 leads

GLM-4.7: 47.0 (#80), Granite 4.2 3b: 36.3 (#171)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Granite 4.2 3b
LMArena Expert14241315
GPQA Diamond83.3%—
SimpleQA Verified32.2%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate11.7%—

Multilingual GLM-4.7 leads

GLM-4.7: 52.8 (#79), Granite 4.2 3b: 42.1 (#198)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Granite 4.2 3b
LMArena Non-English14171268
LMArena Chinese14951269
LMArena Russian14231249
LMArena French1432—
LMArena German1424—
LMArena Japanese1439—
LMArena Korean1399—
LMArena Spanish1434—

Instruction Following GLM-4.7 leads

GLM-4.7: 74.4 (#95), Granite 4.2 3b: 67.1 (#200)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Granite 4.2 3b
LMArena Instruction Following14111273

Long Context GLM-4.7 leads

GLM-4.7: 42.8 (#116), Granite 4.2 3b: 39.2 (#185)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Granite 4.2 3b
LMArena Longer Query14321291
CL-bench15.9%—
CL-bench Life10.9%—

Writing & Preference GLM-4.7 leads

GLM-4.7: 60.9 (#93), Granite 4.2 3b: 47.2 (#212)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Granite 4.2 3b
LMArena Text14351293
LMArena Creative Writing14011205
LMArena Multi-Turn14461290
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1413—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-4.7 better than Granite 4.2 3b?

GLM-4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.0 to 39.4 on the Noometry Index.

Is GLM-4.7 or Granite 4.2 3b better for coding?

GLM-4.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 44.0 versus 40.0 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do GLM-4.7 and Granite 4.2 3b share?

11 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.7 has 36 scored results on Noometry and Granite 4.2 3b has 11.

Related comparisons

Go deeper