# GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen1.5 4b Chat

> GLM-4.7-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.8 to 28.8 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/glm-4-7-flash-vs-qwen1-5-4b-chat
- Last updated: 2026-10-12
- Shared benchmarks: 13

## Summary

- They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.7-Flash scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen1.5 4b Chat in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where GLM-4.7-Flash leads 47.4 to 23.8.

## Snapshot

| | GLM-4.7-Flash | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 38.8 | 28.8 |
| Rank | 180 | 322 |
| Context | 200K | — |
| Input $/M | $0.06 | — |
| Output $/M | $0.40 | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- GLM-4.7-Flash: 40.6 (#135)
- Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 29.1 (#308)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1383 | 999 |

## Reasoning

- GLM-4.7-Flash: 20.9 (#229)
- Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 18.5 (#279)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1356 | 976 |
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | — |

## Math

- GLM-4.7-Flash: 36.1 (#173)
- Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 30.4 (#234)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1355 | 1026 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 58.3% | — |

## Knowledge

- GLM-4.7-Flash: 35.5 (#184)
- Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 26.7 (#255)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1357 | 980 |
| GPQA Diamond | 60.5% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 9.3% | — |

## Multilingual

- GLM-4.7-Flash: 46.5 (#158)
- Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 24.1 (#290)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1330 | 979 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1403 | 1024 |
| LMArena German | 1337 | 902 |
| LMArena Russian | 1332 | 952 |
| LMArena French | 1332 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1283 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1350 | — |

## Instruction Following

- GLM-4.7-Flash: 70.1 (#167)
- Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 49.0 (#300)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1327 | 978 |

## Long Context

- GLM-4.7-Flash: 40.9 (#148)
- Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 30.1 (#290)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1345 | 988 |

## Writing & Preference

- GLM-4.7-Flash: 47.4 (#210)
- Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 23.8 (#309)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1351 | 997 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1297 | 969 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1342 | 977 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1125 | — |

## FAQ

### Is GLM-4.7-Flash better than Qwen1.5 4b Chat?

GLM-4.7-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.8 to 28.8 on the Noometry Index.

### Is GLM-4.7-Flash or Qwen1.5 4b Chat better for coding?

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

### How many benchmarks do GLM-4.7-Flash and Qwen1.5 4b Chat share?

13 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.7-Flash has 21 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5 4b Chat has 13.