Model comparison
GLM-5V-Turbo vs Grok 4.7
Grok 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.6 to 43.1 on the Noometry Index. GLM-5V-Turbo costs 1.6× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.7's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 13 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-5V-Turbo scores higher in 5 categories and Grok 4.7 in 4 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in coding, where Grok 4.7 leads 55.0 to 41.8.
- GLM-5V-Turbo is cheaper at $1.20 / $4 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $6 for Grok 4.7.
- Grok 4.7 accepts more context: 500K tokens versus 200K.
Side by side
| GLM-5V-Turbo | Grok 4.7 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | xAI |
| Noometry Index | 43.1 | 46.6 |
| Released | 2026-04-01 | 2026-09-21 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 200K | 500K |
| Max output | 131K | 500K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $1.20 | $2 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $4 | $6 |
| Results tracked | 19 | 21 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Grok 4.7 leads
GLM-5V-Turbo: 41.8 (#105), Grok 4.7: 55.0 (#23)
| Benchmark | GLM-5V-Turbo | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1400 | 1636 |
| LMArena Coding | 1467 | 1423 |
| CursorBench | — | 46.3% |
| FrontierSWE | — | 29.5% |
| SciCode | — | 57.4% |
Reasoning Grok 4.7 leads
GLM-5V-Turbo: 28.5 (#87), Grok 4.7: 40.1 (#49)
| Benchmark | GLM-5V-Turbo | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1443 | 1409 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 76.8% |
| CritPt | — | 17.7% |
Math Grok 4.7 leads
GLM-5V-Turbo: 36.6 (#109), Grok 4.7: 41.1 (#73)
| Benchmark | GLM-5V-Turbo | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1440 | 1393 |
| ProofBench | — | 34% |
Knowledge GLM-5V-Turbo leads
GLM-5V-Turbo: 39.9 (#113), Grok 4.7: 38.7 (#130)
| Benchmark | GLM-5V-Turbo | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1451 | 1413 |
Multimodal GLM-5V-Turbo leads
GLM-5V-Turbo: 40.1 (#41), Grok 4.7: 28.8 (#107)
| Benchmark | GLM-5V-Turbo | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1264 | — |
| Furniture Assembly | — | 20.8% |
| LMArena Document | 1416 | — |
Multilingual GLM-5V-Turbo leads
GLM-5V-Turbo: 53.2 (#69), Grok 4.7: 51.2 (#108)
| Benchmark | GLM-5V-Turbo | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1420 | 1392 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1488 | 1476 |
| LMArena Russian | 1432 | 1396 |
| LMArena French | 1443 | — |
| LMArena German | 1422 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1399 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1446 | — |
Instruction Following Too close to call
GLM-5V-Turbo: 75.1 (#75), Grok 4.7: 74.3 (#98)
| Benchmark | GLM-5V-Turbo | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1422 | 1406 |
Long Context Too close to call
GLM-5V-Turbo: 44.0 (#76), Grok 4.7: 43.2 (#97)
| Benchmark | GLM-5V-Turbo | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1439 | 1416 |
Writing & Preference Grok 4.7 leads
GLM-5V-Turbo: 62.6 (#69), Grok 4.7: 70.1 (#23)
| Benchmark | GLM-5V-Turbo | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1437 | 1397 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1414 | 1391 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1432 | 1389 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 2007 |
Frequently asked questions
Is GLM-5V-Turbo better than Grok 4.7?
Grok 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.6 to 43.1 on the Noometry Index. GLM-5V-Turbo costs 1.6× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.7's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, GLM-5V-Turbo or Grok 4.7?
GLM-5V-Turbo is cheaper. It lists at $1.20 per million input tokens and $4 per million output tokens; Grok 4.7 lists at $2 and $6.
Is GLM-5V-Turbo or Grok 4.7 better for coding?
Grok 4.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 55.0 versus 41.8 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Grok 4.7 does, with 500K tokens against 200K.
How many benchmarks do GLM-5V-Turbo and Grok 4.7 share?
13 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5V-Turbo has 19 scored results on Noometry and Grok 4.7 has 21.