Noometry

Model comparison

GLM-4.7 vs Grok 4 Fast

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

Last verified . 20 shared benchmarks.

GLM-4.7 Z.ai (Zhipu)

42.0

Rank #124 Confirmed

Grok 4 Fast xAI

39.4

Rank #167 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 20 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.7 scores higher in 6 categories and Grok 4 Fast in 3 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in long context, where Grok 4 Fast leads 63.2 to 42.8.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is Vectara Hallucination Rate: 11.7% for GLM-4.7 and 19.7% for Grok 4 Fast.
  • GLM-4.7 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GLM-4.7Grok 4 Fast
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)xAI
Noometry Index42.039.4
Released2025-12-222025-09-19
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window205K—
Max output131K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.60—
Output $ / M tokens$2.20—
Results tracked3630

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), Grok 4 Fast: 32.5 (#271)

BenchmarkGLM-4.7Grok 4 Fast
LMArena WebDev14351159
LMArena Coding14541429
SciCode45.1%—
WeirdML—42.9%
ALE-Bench399.48—

Agentic & Tool Use Grok 4 Fast leads

GLM-4.7: 26.5 (#103), Grok 4 Fast: 29.5 (#86)

BenchmarkGLM-4.7Grok 4 Fast
Terminal-Bench33.4%—
τ²-bench Banking—15.7%
Cybench—30%
LMArena Search—1171
Vending-Bench 22,377—

Reasoning GLM-4.7 leads

GLM-4.7: 24.3 (#164), Grok 4 Fast: 22.2 (#201)

BenchmarkGLM-4.7Grok 4 Fast
LMArena Hard Prompts14431412
Epoch Capabilities Index143.51144.2
ARC-AGI-2—5.3%
SimpleBench47.7%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark—66.1%
ARC-AGI-1—48.5%
CritPt1.7%—
Chess Puzzles6%—
DTBench—82.7%
ForecastBench—60.5

Math Too close to call

GLM-4.7: 38.6 (#135), Grok 4 Fast: 38.9 (#123)

BenchmarkGLM-4.7Grok 4 Fast
LMArena Math14231419
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202583.3%—
ProofBench6%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)2.4%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)0%—

Knowledge GLM-4.7 leads

GLM-4.7: 47.0 (#80), Grok 4 Fast: 32.0 (#214)

BenchmarkGLM-4.7Grok 4 Fast
Vectara Hallucination Rate11.7%19.7%
LMArena Expert14241411
GPQA Diamond83.3%—
SimpleQA Verified32.2%—

Multilingual GLM-4.7 leads

GLM-4.7: 52.8 (#79), Grok 4 Fast: 51.3 (#111)

BenchmarkGLM-4.7Grok 4 Fast
LMArena Non-English14171396
LMArena Chinese14951457
LMArena French14321431
LMArena German14241383
LMArena Japanese14391352
LMArena Korean13991357
LMArena Russian14231389
LMArena Spanish14341415

Instruction Following GLM-4.7 leads

GLM-4.7: 74.4 (#95), Grok 4 Fast: 73.2 (#121)

BenchmarkGLM-4.7Grok 4 Fast
LMArena Instruction Following14111387

Long Context Grok 4 Fast leads

GLM-4.7: 42.8 (#116), Grok 4 Fast: 63.2 (#3)

BenchmarkGLM-4.7Grok 4 Fast
LMArena Longer Query14321415
Fiction.LiveBench—94.4%
CL-bench15.9%—
CL-bench Life10.9%—

Writing & Preference Too close to call

GLM-4.7: 60.9 (#93), Grok 4 Fast: 60.0 (#102)

BenchmarkGLM-4.7Grok 4 Fast
LMArena Text14351407
LMArena Creative Writing14011387
LMArena Multi-Turn14461414
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1413—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-4.7 better than Grok 4 Fast?

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

Is GLM-4.7 or Grok 4 Fast better for coding?

GLM-4.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 44.0 versus 32.5 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do GLM-4.7 and Grok 4 Fast share?

20 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.7 has 36 scored results on Noometry and Grok 4 Fast has 30.

Related comparisons

Go deeper