Model comparison

GLM-4.7 vs o1-pro

GLM-4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.0 to 31.5 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.

GLM-4.7 Z.ai (Zhipu)

42.0

Rank #124 Confirmed

o1-pro OpenAI

31.5

Rank #271 Reported

Summary

  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where GLM-4.7 leads 47.0 to 29.7.
  • GLM-4.7 is cheaper at $0.60 / $2.20 per million input/output tokens, against $150 / $600 for o1-pro.
  • GLM-4.7 accepts more context: 205K tokens versus 200K.
  • GLM-4.7 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GLM-4.7 and o1-pro specifications
GLM-4.7o1-pro
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)OpenAI
Noometry Index42.031.5
Released2025-12-222025-03-19
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window205K200K
Max output131K100K
Input $ / M tokens$0.60$150
Output $ / M tokens$2.20$600
Results tracked363

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

GLM-4.7: 44.0 (#79), o1-pro: —

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.7o1-pro
LMArena WebDev1435—
SciCode45.1%—
LMArena Coding1454—
ALE-Bench399.48—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GLM-4.7: 26.5 (#103), o1-pro: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.7o1-pro
Terminal-Bench33.4%—
Vending-Bench 22,377—

Reasoning GLM-4.7 leads

GLM-4.7: 24.3 (#164), o1-pro: 20.4 (#239)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.7o1-pro
SimpleBench47.7%—
ARC-AGI-1—23.3%
CritPt1.7%—
Chess Puzzles6%—
EnigmaEval—6.1%
LMArena Hard Prompts1443—
Epoch Capabilities Index143.51—

Math Not comparable

GLM-4.7: 38.6 (#135), o1-pro: —

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.7o1-pro
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), o1-pro: 29.7 (#234)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.7o1-pro
GPQA Diamond83.3%—
Humanity's Last Exam—8.1%
SimpleQA Verified32.2%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate11.7%—
LMArena Expert1424—

Multilingual Not comparable

GLM-4.7: 52.8 (#79), o1-pro: —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.7o1-pro
LMArena Non-English1417—
LMArena Chinese1495—
LMArena French1432—
LMArena German1424—
LMArena Japanese1439—
LMArena Korean1399—
LMArena Russian1423—
LMArena Spanish1434—

Instruction Following Not comparable

GLM-4.7: 74.4 (#95), o1-pro: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.7o1-pro
LMArena Instruction Following1411—

Long Context Not comparable

GLM-4.7: 42.8 (#116), o1-pro: —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.7o1-pro
CL-bench15.9%—
CL-bench Life10.9%—
LMArena Longer Query1432—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

GLM-4.7: 60.9 (#93), o1-pro: —

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.7o1-pro
LMArena Text1435—
LMArena Creative Writing1401—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1413—
LMArena Multi-Turn1446—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-4.7 better than o1-pro?

GLM-4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.0 to 31.5 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, GLM-4.7 or o1-pro?

GLM-4.7 is cheaper. It lists at $0.60 per million input tokens and $2.20 per million output tokens; o1-pro lists at $150 and $600.

Which has the bigger context window?

GLM-4.7 does, with 205K tokens against 200K.

How many benchmarks do GLM-4.7 and o1-pro share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.7 has 36 scored results on Noometry and o1-pro has 3.

Related comparisons

Go deeper