Model comparison
GLM-4.7 vs Hunyuan T1 20250711
GLM-4.7 and Hunyuan T1 20250711 score almost the same on the Noometry Index (41.7 vs 41.8), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Last verified . 13 shared benchmarks.
TencentSummary
- They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.7 scores higher in 7 categories and Hunyuan T1 20250711 in 1 category; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where GLM-4.7 leads 47.0 to 38.1.
- GLM-4.7 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| GLM-4.7 | Hunyuan T1 20250711 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | Tencent |
| Noometry Index | 41.7 | 41.8 |
| Released | 2025-12-22 | — |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 205K | — |
| Max output | 131K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.60 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $2.20 | — |
| Results tracked | 36 | 13 |
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), Hunyuan T1 20250711: 40.2 (#129)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7 | Hunyuan T1 20250711 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1454 | 1389 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1435 | — |
| SciCode | 45.1% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 399.48 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
GLM-4.7: 26.4 (#96), Hunyuan T1 20250711: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7 | Hunyuan T1 20250711 |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 33.4% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 2,377 | — |
Reasoning Hunyuan T1 20250711 leads
GLM-4.7: 23.7 (#161), Hunyuan T1 20250711: 27.3 (#106)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7 | Hunyuan T1 20250711 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1443 | 1399 |
| SimpleBench | 47.7% | — |
| CritPt | 1.7% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 6% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 143.53 | — |
Math GLM-4.7 leads
GLM-4.7: 37.7 (#92), Hunyuan T1 20250711: 36.0 (#132)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7 | Hunyuan T1 20250711 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1423 | 1414 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 83.3% | — |
| ProofBench | 6% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 2.4% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 0% | — |
Knowledge GLM-4.7 leads
GLM-4.7: 47.0 (#74), Hunyuan T1 20250711: 38.1 (#139)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7 | Hunyuan T1 20250711 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1424 | 1395 |
| GPQA Diamond | 83.3% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 32.2% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 11.7% | — |
Multilingual GLM-4.7 leads
GLM-4.7: 53.0 (#75), Hunyuan T1 20250711: 51.4 (#107)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7 | Hunyuan T1 20250711 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1417 | 1395 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1495 | 1424 |
| LMArena Korean | 1401 | 1403 |
| LMArena Russian | 1423 | 1384 |
| LMArena French | 1432 | — |
| LMArena German | 1426 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1439 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1433 | — |
Instruction Following GLM-4.7 leads
GLM-4.7: 74.6 (#90), Hunyuan T1 20250711: 72.8 (#130)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7 | Hunyuan T1 20250711 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1411 | 1375 |
Long Context Too close to call
GLM-4.7: 42.8 (#111), Hunyuan T1 20250711: 42.2 (#123)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7 | Hunyuan T1 20250711 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1432 | 1384 |
| CL-bench | 15.9% | — |
| CL-bench Life | 10.9% | — |
Writing & Preference GLM-4.7 leads
GLM-4.7: 61.1 (#89), Hunyuan T1 20250711: 59.7 (#105)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7 | Hunyuan T1 20250711 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1436 | 1401 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1401 | 1391 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1446 | 1393 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1413 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is GLM-4.7 better than Hunyuan T1 20250711?
GLM-4.7 and Hunyuan T1 20250711 score almost the same on the Noometry Index (41.7 vs 41.8), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Is GLM-4.7 or Hunyuan T1 20250711 better for coding?
GLM-4.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 43.6 versus 40.2 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do GLM-4.7 and Hunyuan T1 20250711 share?
13 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.7 has 36 scored results on Noometry and Hunyuan T1 20250711 has 13.