# GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen Max

> GLM-4.7-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.8 to 34.7 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/glm-4-7-flash-vs-qwen-max
- Last updated: 2026-10-11
- Shared benchmarks: 18

## Summary

- They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.7-Flash scores higher in 6 categories and Qwen Max in 2 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where GLM-4.7-Flash leads 36.1 to 22.3.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 58.3% for GLM-4.7-Flash and 16.1% for Qwen Max.
- GLM-4.7-Flash is cheaper at $0.06 / $0.40 per million input/output tokens, against $1.60 / $6.40 for Qwen Max.
- GLM-4.7-Flash accepts more context: 200K tokens versus 33K.
- GLM-4.7-Flash has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | GLM-4.7-Flash | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 38.8 | 34.7 |
| Rank | 180 | 230 |
| Context | 200K | 33K |
| Input $/M | $0.06 | $1.60 |
| Output $/M | $0.40 | $6.40 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |

## Coding

- GLM-4.7-Flash: 40.6 (#135)
- Qwen Max: 30.7 (#292)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1383 | 1288 |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 21.8% |

## Reasoning

- GLM-4.7-Flash: 20.9 (#229)
- Qwen Max: 25.1 (#151)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1356 | 1269 |
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | — |

## Math

- GLM-4.7-Flash: 36.1 (#173)
- Qwen Max: 22.3 (#276)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 58.3% | 16.1% |
| LMArena Math | 1355 | 1275 |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 67.2% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 1% |

## Knowledge

- GLM-4.7-Flash: 35.5 (#184)
- Qwen Max: 30.3 (#228)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 60.5% | 56.1% |
| LMArena Expert | 1357 | 1248 |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 9.3% | — |

## Multilingual

- GLM-4.7-Flash: 46.5 (#158)
- Qwen Max: 41.8 (#202)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1330 | 1263 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1403 | 1254 |
| LMArena French | 1332 | 1330 |
| LMArena German | 1337 | 1254 |
| LMArena Korean | 1283 | 1142 |
| LMArena Russian | 1332 | 1274 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1350 | 1290 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1205 |

## Instruction Following

- GLM-4.7-Flash: 70.1 (#167)
- Qwen Max: 66.5 (#208)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1327 | 1262 |

## Long Context

- GLM-4.7-Flash: 40.9 (#148)
- Qwen Max: 39.4 (#180)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1345 | 1288 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 66.7% |

## Writing & Preference

- GLM-4.7-Flash: 47.4 (#210)
- Qwen Max: 47.8 (#205)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1351 | 1282 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1297 | 1248 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1342 | 1277 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1125 | — |

## FAQ

### Is GLM-4.7-Flash better than Qwen Max?

GLM-4.7-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.8 to 34.7 on the Noometry Index.

### Which is cheaper, GLM-4.7-Flash or Qwen Max?

GLM-4.7-Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.06 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; Qwen Max lists at $1.60 and $6.40.

### Is GLM-4.7-Flash or Qwen Max better for coding?

GLM-4.7-Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.6 versus 30.7 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

GLM-4.7-Flash does, with 200K tokens against 33K.

### How many benchmarks do GLM-4.7-Flash and Qwen Max share?

18 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.7-Flash has 21 scored results on Noometry and Qwen Max has 23.