# DeepSeek LLM 67B vs GLM-4.7-Flash

> GLM-4.7-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.4 to 24.8 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/deepseek-llm-67b-vs-glm-4-7-flash
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 13

## Summary

- They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. DeepSeek LLM 67B scores higher in 0 categories and GLM-4.7-Flash in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where GLM-4.7-Flash leads 35.4 to 7.1.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 0.8% for DeepSeek LLM 67B and 58.3% for GLM-4.7-Flash.

## Snapshot

| | DeepSeek LLM 67B | GLM-4.7-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | DeepSeek | Z.ai (Zhipu) |
| Noometry Index | 24.8 | 38.4 |
| Rank | 341 | 175 |
| Context | — | 200K |
| Input $/M | — | $0.06 |
| Output $/M | — | $0.40 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- DeepSeek LLM 67B: 31.3 (#273)
- GLM-4.7-Flash: 40.0 (#133)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek LLM 67B | GLM-4.7-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1096 | 1383 |

## Reasoning

- DeepSeek LLM 67B: 15.9 (#300)
- GLM-4.7-Flash: 20.2 (#224)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek LLM 67B | GLM-4.7-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | 0% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1070 | 1356 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 110.54 | — |

## Math

- DeepSeek LLM 67B: 8.1 (#318)
- GLM-4.7-Flash: 34.4 (#159)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek LLM 67B | GLM-4.7-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 0.8% | 58.3% |
| LMArena Math | 1108 | 1354 |
| MATH Level 5 | 6.4% | — |

## Knowledge

- DeepSeek LLM 67B: 7.1 (#308)
- GLM-4.7-Flash: 35.4 (#177)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek LLM 67B | GLM-4.7-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 24.6% | 60.5% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 9.3% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1357 |

## Multilingual

- DeepSeek LLM 67B: 29.5 (#262)
- GLM-4.7-Flash: 46.8 (#152)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek LLM 67B | GLM-4.7-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1073 | 1331 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1132 | 1403 |
| LMArena French | — | 1332 |
| LMArena German | — | 1336 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1284 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1333 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1351 |

## Instruction Following

- DeepSeek LLM 67B: 55.7 (#272)
- GLM-4.7-Flash: 70.3 (#162)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek LLM 67B | GLM-4.7-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1079 | 1327 |

## Long Context

- DeepSeek LLM 67B: 33.1 (#260)
- GLM-4.7-Flash: 40.9 (#143)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek LLM 67B | GLM-4.7-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1092 | 1345 |

## Writing & Preference

- DeepSeek LLM 67B: 31.8 (#277)
- GLM-4.7-Flash: 47.7 (#206)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek LLM 67B | GLM-4.7-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1105 | 1351 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1067 | 1297 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1082 | 1342 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1125 |

## FAQ

### Is DeepSeek LLM 67B better than GLM-4.7-Flash?

GLM-4.7-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.4 to 24.8 on the Noometry Index.

### Is DeepSeek LLM 67B or GLM-4.7-Flash better for coding?

GLM-4.7-Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.0 versus 31.3 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do DeepSeek LLM 67B and GLM-4.7-Flash share?

13 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek LLM 67B has 15 scored results on Noometry and GLM-4.7-Flash has 21.