# GLM-4.6V vs Grok 4.7

> Grok 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.6 to 40.9 on the Noometry Index. GLM-4.6V costs 6.7× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.7's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/glm-4-6v-vs-grok-4-7
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 11

## Summary

- They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.6V scores higher in 1 category and Grok 4.7 in 7 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in coding, where Grok 4.7 leads 55.0 to 40.2.
- GLM-4.6V is cheaper at $0.30 / $0.90 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $6 for Grok 4.7.
- Grok 4.7 accepts more context: 500K tokens versus 128K.
- GLM-4.6V has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | GLM-4.6V | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | xAI |
| Noometry Index | 40.9 | 46.6 |
| Rank | 133 | 56 |
| Context | 128K | 500K |
| Input $/M | $0.30 | $2 |
| Output $/M | $0.90 | $6 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |

## Coding

- GLM-4.6V: 40.2 (#128)
- Grok 4.7: 55.0 (#23)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1390 | 1423 |
| CursorBench | — | 46.3% |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1636 |
| FrontierSWE | — | 29.5% |
| SciCode | — | 57.4% |

## Reasoning

- GLM-4.6V: 26.5 (#117)
- Grok 4.7: 40.1 (#49)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1368 | 1409 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 76.8% |
| CritPt | — | 17.7% |

## Math

- GLM-4.6V: —
- Grok 4.7: 41.1 (#73)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| ProofBench | — | 34% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1393 |

## Knowledge

- GLM-4.6V: 37.4 (#148)
- Grok 4.7: 38.7 (#130)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1372 | 1413 |

## Multimodal

- GLM-4.6V: 34.2 (#83)
- Grok 4.7: 28.8 (#107)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1164 | — |
| Furniture Assembly | — | 20.8% |

## Multilingual

- GLM-4.6V: 48.8 (#135)
- Grok 4.7: 51.2 (#108)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1359 | 1392 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1426 | 1476 |
| LMArena Russian | 1341 | 1396 |

## Instruction Following

- GLM-4.6V: 71.6 (#145)
- Grok 4.7: 74.3 (#98)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1351 | 1406 |

## Long Context

- GLM-4.6V: 41.3 (#138)
- Grok 4.7: 43.2 (#97)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1358 | 1416 |

## Writing & Preference

- GLM-4.6V: 56.8 (#132)
- Grok 4.7: 70.1 (#23)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1377 | 1397 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1347 | 1391 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1359 | 1389 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 2007 |

## FAQ

### Is GLM-4.6V better than Grok 4.7?

Grok 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.6 to 40.9 on the Noometry Index. GLM-4.6V costs 6.7× 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-4.6V or Grok 4.7?

GLM-4.6V is cheaper. It lists at $0.30 per million input tokens and $0.90 per million output tokens; Grok 4.7 lists at $2 and $6.

### Is GLM-4.6V or Grok 4.7 better for coding?

Grok 4.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 55.0 versus 40.2 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Grok 4.7 does, with 500K tokens against 128K.

### How many benchmarks do GLM-4.6V and Grok 4.7 share?

11 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.6V has 12 scored results on Noometry and Grok 4.7 has 21.