Noometry

Model comparison

GLM-4.7 vs Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1

GLM-4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.0 to 36.7 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 10 shared benchmarks.

GLM-4.7 Z.ai (Zhipu)

42.0

Rank #124 Confirmed

Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1 NVIDIA

36.7

Rank #213 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 10 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.7 scores higher in 7 categories and Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1 in 1 category; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in agentic & tool use, where GLM-4.7 leads 26.5 to 15.7.

Side by side

GLM-4.7Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)NVIDIA
Noometry Index42.036.7
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), Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1: 38.4 (#177)

BenchmarkGLM-4.7Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1
LMArena Coding14541312
LMArena WebDev1435—
SciCode45.1%—
ALE-Bench399.48—

Agentic & Tool Use GLM-4.7 leads

GLM-4.7: 26.5 (#103), Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1: 15.7 (#149)

BenchmarkGLM-4.7Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1
Terminal-Bench33.4%—
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—10%
Vending-Bench 22,377—

Reasoning Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1 leads

GLM-4.7: 24.3 (#164), Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1: 26.3 (#134)

BenchmarkGLM-4.7Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1
LMArena Hard Prompts14431316
SimpleBench47.7%—
CritPt1.7%—
Chess Puzzles6%—
Epoch Capabilities Index143.51—

Math GLM-4.7 leads

GLM-4.7: 38.6 (#135), Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1: 37.5 (#152)

BenchmarkGLM-4.7Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1
LMArena Math14231360
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202583.3%—
ProofBench6%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)2.4%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)0%—

Knowledge Not comparable

GLM-4.7: 47.0 (#80), Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1: —

BenchmarkGLM-4.7Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1
GPQA Diamond83.3%—
SimpleQA Verified32.2%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate11.7%—
LMArena Expert1424—

Multilingual GLM-4.7 leads

GLM-4.7: 52.8 (#79), Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1: 43.1 (#187)

BenchmarkGLM-4.7Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1
LMArena Non-English14171282
LMArena Russian14231284
LMArena Chinese1495—
LMArena French1432—
LMArena German1424—
LMArena Japanese1439—
LMArena Korean1399—
LMArena Spanish1434—

Instruction Following GLM-4.7 leads

GLM-4.7: 74.4 (#95), Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1: 69.0 (#178)

BenchmarkGLM-4.7Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1
LMArena Instruction Following14111308

Long Context GLM-4.7 leads

GLM-4.7: 42.8 (#116), Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1: 39.5 (#177)

BenchmarkGLM-4.7Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1
LMArena Longer Query14321299
CL-bench15.9%—
CL-bench Life10.9%—

Writing & Preference GLM-4.7 leads

GLM-4.7: 60.9 (#93), Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1: 52.2 (#175)

BenchmarkGLM-4.7Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1
LMArena Text14351320
LMArena Creative Writing14011314
LMArena Multi-Turn14461317
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1413—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-4.7 better than Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1?

GLM-4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.0 to 36.7 on the Noometry Index.

Is GLM-4.7 or Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1 better for coding?

GLM-4.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 44.0 versus 38.4 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do GLM-4.7 and Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1 share?

10 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.7 has 36 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1 has 11.

Related comparisons

Go deeper