Model comparison

GLM-4.7 vs Palm 2

GLM-4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.0 to 30.0 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 10 shared benchmarks.

GLM-4.7 Z.ai (Zhipu)

42.0

Rank #124 Confirmed

Palm 2 Google

30.0

Rank #298 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 10 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.7 scores higher in 7 categories and Palm 2 in 0 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where GLM-4.7 leads 60.9 to 25.6.
  • GLM-4.7 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GLM-4.7 and Palm 2 specifications
GLM-4.7Palm 2
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)Google
Noometry Index42.030.0
Released2025-12-22—
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window205K—
Max output131K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.60—
Output $ / M tokens$2.20—
Results tracked3610

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), Palm 2: 29.0 (#311)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Palm 2
LMArena Coding1454994
LMArena WebDev1435—
SciCode45.1%—
ALE-Bench399.48—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GLM-4.7: 26.5 (#103), Palm 2: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Palm 2
Terminal-Bench33.4%—
Vending-Bench 22,377—

Reasoning GLM-4.7 leads

GLM-4.7: 24.3 (#164), Palm 2: 19.1 (#271)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Palm 2
LMArena Hard Prompts14431005
SimpleBench47.7%—
CritPt1.7%—
Chess Puzzles6%—
Epoch Capabilities Index143.51—

Math GLM-4.7 leads

GLM-4.7: 38.6 (#135), Palm 2: 30.8 (#231)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Palm 2
LMArena Math14231049
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), Palm 2: —

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

Multilingual GLM-4.7 leads

GLM-4.7: 52.8 (#79), Palm 2: 20.9 (#295)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Palm 2
LMArena Non-English1417916
LMArena Chinese1495887
LMArena French1432—
LMArena German1424—
LMArena Japanese1439—
LMArena Korean1399—
LMArena Russian1423—
LMArena Spanish1434—

Instruction Following GLM-4.7 leads

GLM-4.7: 74.4 (#95), Palm 2: 51.0 (#296)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Palm 2
LMArena Instruction Following14111010

Long Context GLM-4.7 leads

GLM-4.7: 42.8 (#116), Palm 2: 30.8 (#285)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Palm 2
LMArena Longer Query14321010
CL-bench15.9%—
CL-bench Life10.9%—

Writing & Preference GLM-4.7 leads

GLM-4.7: 60.9 (#93), Palm 2: 25.6 (#304)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Palm 2
LMArena Text14351027
LMArena Creative Writing1401991
LMArena Multi-Turn1446994
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1413—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-4.7 better than Palm 2?

GLM-4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.0 to 30.0 on the Noometry Index.

Is GLM-4.7 or Palm 2 better for coding?

GLM-4.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 44.0 versus 29.0 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do GLM-4.7 and Palm 2 share?

10 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.7 has 36 scored results on Noometry and Palm 2 has 10.

Related comparisons

Go deeper