Noometry

Model comparison

GLM-4.7 vs Step 3.7 Flash

GLM-4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.0 to 37.3 on the Noometry Index. Step 3.7 Flash costs 2.4× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-4.7's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 3 shared benchmarks.

GLM-4.7 Z.ai (Zhipu)

42.0

Rank #124 Confirmed

Step 3.7 Flash StepFun

37.3

Rank #207 Reported

Summary

  • They share 3 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.7 scores higher in 2 categories and Step 3.7 Flash in 1 category; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Step 3.7 Flash leads 42.9 to 38.6.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is SciCode: 45.1% for GLM-4.7 and 40% for Step 3.7 Flash.
  • Step 3.7 Flash is cheaper at $0.18 / $1.11 per million input/output tokens, against $0.60 / $2.20 for GLM-4.7.
  • Step 3.7 Flash accepts more context: 256K tokens versus 205K.

Side by side

GLM-4.7Step 3.7 Flash
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)StepFun
Noometry Index42.037.3
Released2025-12-222026-05-29
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window205K256K
Max output131K256K
Input $ / M tokens$0.60$0.18
Output $ / M tokens$2.20$1.11
Results tracked365

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), Step 3.7 Flash: 40.0 (#150)

BenchmarkGLM-4.7Step 3.7 Flash
SciCode45.1%40%
ALE-Bench399.48694.12
LMArena WebDev1435—
LMArena Coding1454—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GLM-4.7: 26.5 (#103), Step 3.7 Flash: —

BenchmarkGLM-4.7Step 3.7 Flash
Terminal-Bench33.4%—
Vending-Bench 22,377—

Reasoning GLM-4.7 leads

GLM-4.7: 24.3 (#164), Step 3.7 Flash: 21.6 (#219)

BenchmarkGLM-4.7Step 3.7 Flash
CritPt1.7%2.3%
SimpleBench47.7%—
NYT Connections (extended)—39.7%
Chess Puzzles6%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1443—
Epoch Capabilities Index143.51—

Math Step 3.7 Flash leads

GLM-4.7: 38.6 (#135), Step 3.7 Flash: 42.9 (#82)

BenchmarkGLM-4.7Step 3.7 Flash
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions—68.5%
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), Step 3.7 Flash: —

BenchmarkGLM-4.7Step 3.7 Flash
GPQA Diamond83.3%—
SimpleQA Verified32.2%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate11.7%—
LMArena Expert1424—

Multilingual Not comparable

GLM-4.7: 52.8 (#79), Step 3.7 Flash: —

BenchmarkGLM-4.7Step 3.7 Flash
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), Step 3.7 Flash: —

BenchmarkGLM-4.7Step 3.7 Flash
LMArena Instruction Following1411—

Long Context Not comparable

GLM-4.7: 42.8 (#116), Step 3.7 Flash: —

BenchmarkGLM-4.7Step 3.7 Flash
CL-bench15.9%—
CL-bench Life10.9%—
LMArena Longer Query1432—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

GLM-4.7: 60.9 (#93), Step 3.7 Flash: —

BenchmarkGLM-4.7Step 3.7 Flash
LMArena Text1435—
LMArena Creative Writing1401—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1413—
LMArena Multi-Turn1446—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-4.7 better than Step 3.7 Flash?

GLM-4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.0 to 37.3 on the Noometry Index. Step 3.7 Flash costs 2.4× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-4.7's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, GLM-4.7 or Step 3.7 Flash?

Step 3.7 Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.18 per million input tokens and $1.11 per million output tokens; GLM-4.7 lists at $0.60 and $2.20.

Is GLM-4.7 or Step 3.7 Flash better for coding?

GLM-4.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 44.0 versus 40.0 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Step 3.7 Flash does, with 256K tokens against 205K.

How many benchmarks do GLM-4.7 and Step 3.7 Flash share?

3 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.7 has 36 scored results on Noometry and Step 3.7 Flash has 5.

Related comparisons

Go deeper