Model comparison

GLM-4.7 vs Mercury

GLM-4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.0 to 37.6 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 8 shared benchmarks.

GLM-4.7 Z.ai (Zhipu)

42.0

Rank #124 Confirmed

Mercury Inception

37.6

Rank #199 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 8 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.7 scores higher in 6 categories and Mercury in 0 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where GLM-4.7 leads 60.9 to 46.2.
  • GLM-4.7 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GLM-4.7 and Mercury specifications
GLM-4.7Mercury
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)Inception
Noometry Index42.037.6
Released2025-12-22—
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window205K—
Max output131K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.60—
Output $ / M tokens$2.20—
Results tracked369

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), Mercury: 38.7 (#170)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Mercury
LMArena Coding14541322
LMArena WebDev1435—
SciCode45.1%—
ALE-Bench399.48—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GLM-4.7: 26.5 (#103), Mercury: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Mercury
Terminal-Bench33.4%—
Vending-Bench 22,377—

Reasoning GLM-4.7 leads

GLM-4.7: 24.3 (#164), Mercury: 17.5 (#293)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Mercury
LMArena Hard Prompts14431285
SimpleBench47.7%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark—21.6%
CritPt1.7%—
Chess Puzzles6%—
Epoch Capabilities Index143.51—

Math Not comparable

GLM-4.7: 38.6 (#135), Mercury: —

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

Knowledge Not comparable

GLM-4.7: 47.0 (#80), Mercury: —

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Mercury
GPQA Diamond83.3%—
SimpleQA Verified32.2%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate11.7%—
LMArena Expert1424—

Multilingual GLM-4.7 leads

GLM-4.7: 52.8 (#79), Mercury: 41.6 (#206)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Mercury
LMArena Non-English14171260
LMArena Chinese1495—
LMArena French1432—
LMArena German1424—
LMArena Japanese1439—
LMArena Korean1399—
LMArena Russian1423—
LMArena Spanish1434—

Instruction Following GLM-4.7 leads

GLM-4.7: 74.4 (#95), Mercury: 65.2 (#224)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Mercury
LMArena Instruction Following14111239

Long Context GLM-4.7 leads

GLM-4.7: 42.8 (#116), Mercury: 38.4 (#198)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Mercury
LMArena Longer Query14321266
CL-bench15.9%—
CL-bench Life10.9%—

Writing & Preference GLM-4.7 leads

GLM-4.7: 60.9 (#93), Mercury: 46.2 (#221)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Mercury
LMArena Text14351282
LMArena Creative Writing14011191
LMArena Multi-Turn14461282
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1413—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-4.7 better than Mercury?

GLM-4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.0 to 37.6 on the Noometry Index.

Is GLM-4.7 or Mercury better for coding?

GLM-4.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 44.0 versus 38.7 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do GLM-4.7 and Mercury share?

8 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.7 has 36 scored results on Noometry and Mercury has 9.

Related comparisons

Go deeper