# Command R+ vs GLM-4.7-Flash

> GLM-4.7-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.8 to 32.4 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/command-r-plus-vs-glm-4-7-flash
- Last updated: 2026-10-11
- Shared benchmarks: 17

## Summary

- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Command R+ scores higher in 1 category and GLM-4.7-Flash in 7 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where GLM-4.7-Flash leads 20.9 to 9.2.
- GLM-4.7-Flash is cheaper at $0.06 / $0.40 per million input/output tokens, against $2.50 / $10 for Command R+.
- GLM-4.7-Flash accepts more context: 200K tokens versus 128K.

## Snapshot

| | Command R+ | GLM-4.7-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Cohere | Z.ai (Zhipu) |
| Noometry Index | 32.4 | 38.8 |
| Rank | 257 | 180 |
| Context | 128K | 200K |
| Input $/M | $2.50 | $0.06 |
| Output $/M | $10 | $0.40 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Command R+: 29.1 (#309)
- GLM-4.7-Flash: 40.6 (#135)

| Benchmark | Command R+ | GLM-4.7-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1187 | 1383 |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 33.8% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 19.1% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 41.9% | — |
| HumanEval+ | 56.7% | — |
| MBPP+ | 63.5% | — |

## Reasoning

- Command R+: 9.2 (#344)
- GLM-4.7-Flash: 20.9 (#229)

| Benchmark | Command R+ | GLM-4.7-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1186 | 1356 |
| SimpleBench | 17.4% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 0% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 24.8% | — |
| DTBench | 54.9% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 38.1% | — |
| LMCA | 5% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 119.34 | — |
| LiveBench | 31.8% | — |

## Math

- Command R+: 28.9 (#242)
- GLM-4.7-Flash: 36.1 (#173)

| Benchmark | Command R+ | GLM-4.7-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1188 | 1355 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 58.3% |
| LiveBench Math | 21.3% | — |

## Knowledge

- Command R+: 36.4 (#169)
- GLM-4.7-Flash: 35.5 (#184)

| Benchmark | Command R+ | GLM-4.7-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 6.9% | 9.3% |
| LMArena Expert | 1174 | 1357 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 60.5% |
| MMLU | 69.4% | — |

## Multilingual

- Command R+: 38.6 (#227)
- GLM-4.7-Flash: 46.5 (#158)

| Benchmark | Command R+ | GLM-4.7-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1216 | 1330 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1226 | 1403 |
| LMArena French | 1209 | 1332 |
| LMArena German | 1216 | 1337 |
| LMArena Korean | 1138 | 1283 |
| LMArena Russian | 1227 | 1332 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1189 | 1350 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1166 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Command R+: 60.0 (#254)
- GLM-4.7-Flash: 70.1 (#167)

| Benchmark | Command R+ | GLM-4.7-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1197 | 1327 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 57.6% | — |

## Long Context

- Command R+: 37.3 (#219)
- GLM-4.7-Flash: 40.9 (#148)

| Benchmark | Command R+ | GLM-4.7-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1230 | 1345 |

## Writing & Preference

- Command R+: 43.5 (#228)
- GLM-4.7-Flash: 47.4 (#210)

| Benchmark | Command R+ | GLM-4.7-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1229 | 1351 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1235 | 1297 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1213 | 1342 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1125 |
| LiveBench Language | 29.7% | — |

## FAQ

### Is Command R+ better than GLM-4.7-Flash?

GLM-4.7-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.8 to 32.4 on the Noometry Index.

### Which is cheaper, Command R+ or GLM-4.7-Flash?

GLM-4.7-Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.06 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; Command R+ lists at $2.50 and $10.

### Is Command R+ or GLM-4.7-Flash better for coding?

GLM-4.7-Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.6 versus 29.1 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

GLM-4.7-Flash does, with 200K tokens against 128K.

### How many benchmarks do Command R+ and GLM-4.7-Flash share?

17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Command R+ has 34 scored results on Noometry and GLM-4.7-Flash has 21.