# GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen2.5-Coder-32B

> GLM-4.7-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.4 to 32.9 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/glm-4-7-flash-vs-qwen2-5-coder-32b
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 12

## Summary

- They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.7-Flash scores higher in 7 categories and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B in 1 category; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in coding, where GLM-4.7-Flash leads 40.0 to 22.4.
- GLM-4.7-Flash is cheaper at $0.06 / $0.40 per million input/output tokens, against $0.66 / $1 for Qwen2.5-Coder-32B.
- GLM-4.7-Flash accepts more context: 200K tokens versus 33K.

## Snapshot

| | GLM-4.7-Flash | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 38.4 | 32.9 |
| Rank | 175 | 239 |
| Context | 200K | 33K |
| Input $/M | $0.06 | $0.66 |
| Output $/M | $0.40 | $1 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- GLM-4.7-Flash: 40.0 (#133)
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 22.4 (#328)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1383 | 1276 |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | — | 9% |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 16.4% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 49% |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 56.9% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 58% |
| HumanEval+ | — | 87.2% |
| MBPP+ | — | 77% |

## Reasoning

- GLM-4.7-Flash: 20.2 (#224)
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 20.4 (#220)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1356 | 1251 |
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 42.1% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 49.9% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 119.41 |
| HellaSwag | — | 83% |
| LiveBench | — | 46.2% |
| WinoGrande | — | 80.8% |

## Math

- GLM-4.7-Flash: 34.4 (#159)
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 30.8 (#203)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1354 | 1251 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 58.3% | — |
| LiveBench Math | — | 46.6% |
| GSM8K | — | 93% |

## Knowledge

- GLM-4.7-Flash: 35.4 (#177)
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 32.9 (#200)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1357 | 1221 |
| GPQA Diamond | 60.5% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 9.3% | — |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 70.5% |
| MMLU | — | 79.1% |

## Multilingual

- GLM-4.7-Flash: 46.8 (#152)
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 38.0 (#230)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1331 | 1205 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1403 | 1222 |
| LMArena Russian | 1333 | 1228 |
| LMArena French | 1332 | — |
| LMArena German | 1336 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1284 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1351 | — |

## Instruction Following

- GLM-4.7-Flash: 70.3 (#162)
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 61.6 (#240)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1327 | 1223 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 58.7% |

## Long Context

- GLM-4.7-Flash: 40.9 (#143)
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 37.9 (#204)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1345 | 1251 |

## Writing & Preference

- GLM-4.7-Flash: 47.7 (#206)
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 41.8 (#235)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1351 | 1230 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1297 | 1174 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1342 | 1222 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1125 | — |
| LiveBench Language | — | 23.3% |

## FAQ

### Is GLM-4.7-Flash better than Qwen2.5-Coder-32B?

GLM-4.7-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.4 to 32.9 on the Noometry Index.

### Which is cheaper, GLM-4.7-Flash or Qwen2.5-Coder-32B?

GLM-4.7-Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.06 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; Qwen2.5-Coder-32B lists at $0.66 and $1.

### Is GLM-4.7-Flash or Qwen2.5-Coder-32B better for coding?

GLM-4.7-Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.0 versus 22.4 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 Qwen2.5-Coder-32B share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.7-Flash has 21 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B has 31.