Model comparison

GLM-4.7 vs Step 3

GLM-4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.7 to 39.9 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 15 shared benchmarks.

GLM-4.7 Z.ai (Zhipu)

41.7

Rank #117 Confirmed

Step 3 StepFun

39.9

Rank #145 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 15 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.7 scores higher in 7 categories and Step 3 in 1 category; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where GLM-4.7 leads 47.0 to 36.2.

Side by side

GLM-4.7 and Step 3 specifications
GLM-4.7Step 3
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)StepFun
Noometry Index41.739.9
Released2025-12-22—
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window205K—
Max output131K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.60—
Output $ / M tokens$2.20—
Results tracked3617

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), Step 3: 39.5 (#144)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Step 3
LMArena Coding14541367
LMArena WebDev1435—
SciCode45.1%—
ALE-Bench399.48—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GLM-4.7: 26.4 (#96), Step 3: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Step 3
Terminal-Bench33.4%—
Vending-Bench 22,377—

Reasoning Step 3 leads

GLM-4.7: 23.7 (#161), Step 3: 27.6 (#102)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Step 3
LMArena Hard Prompts14431355
SimpleBench47.7%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark—62.3%
CritPt1.7%—
Chess Puzzles6%—
Epoch Capabilities Index143.53—

Math GLM-4.7 leads

GLM-4.7: 37.7 (#92), Step 3: 34.9 (#148)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Step 3
LMArena Math14231366
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202583.3%—
ProofBench6%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)2.4%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)0%—

Knowledge GLM-4.7 leads

GLM-4.7: 47.0 (#74), Step 3: 36.2 (#161)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Step 3
LMArena Expert14241333
GPQA Diamond83.3%—
SimpleQA Verified32.2%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate11.7%—

Multimodal Not comparable

GLM-4.7: —, Step 3: 34.9 (#81)

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Step 3
LMArena Vision—1176

Multilingual GLM-4.7 leads

GLM-4.7: 53.0 (#75), Step 3: 46.5 (#154)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Step 3
LMArena Non-English14171327
LMArena Chinese14951396
LMArena German14261371
LMArena Korean14011271
LMArena Russian14231331
LMArena Spanish14331372
LMArena French1432—
LMArena Japanese1439—

Instruction Following GLM-4.7 leads

GLM-4.7: 74.6 (#90), Step 3: 70.6 (#159)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Step 3
LMArena Instruction Following14111332

Long Context GLM-4.7 leads

GLM-4.7: 42.8 (#111), Step 3: 40.3 (#152)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Step 3
LMArena Longer Query14321326
CL-bench15.9%—
CL-bench Life10.9%—

Writing & Preference GLM-4.7 leads

GLM-4.7: 61.1 (#89), Step 3: 54.5 (#146)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Step 3
LMArena Text14361351
LMArena Creative Writing14011322
LMArena Multi-Turn14461340
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1413—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-4.7 better than Step 3?

GLM-4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.7 to 39.9 on the Noometry Index.

Is GLM-4.7 or Step 3 better for coding?

GLM-4.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 43.6 versus 39.5 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do GLM-4.7 and Step 3 share?

15 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.7 has 36 scored results on Noometry and Step 3 has 17.

Related comparisons

Go deeper