# GLM-4.7 vs Qwen3.6 Flash

> GLM-4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.7 to 38.4 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.6 Flash costs 2.4× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-4.7's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/glm-4-7-vs-qwen3-6-flash
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 9

## Summary

- They share 9 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.7 scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3.6 Flash in 2 categories; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where GLM-4.7 leads 47.0 to 42.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is SimpleQA Verified: 32.2% for GLM-4.7 and 15.9% for Qwen3.6 Flash.
- Qwen3.6 Flash is cheaper at $0.19 / $1.13 per million input/output tokens, against $0.60 / $2.20 for GLM-4.7.
- Qwen3.6 Flash accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 205K.
- GLM-4.7 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | GLM-4.7 | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 41.7 | 38.4 |
| Rank | 117 | 176 |
| Context | 205K | 1M |
| Input $/M | $0.60 | $0.19 |
| Output $/M | $2.20 | $1.13 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |

## Coding

- GLM-4.7: 43.6 (#74)
- Qwen3.6 Flash: —

| Benchmark | GLM-4.7 | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| ALE-Bench | 399.48 | 326.4 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1435 | — |
| SciCode | 45.1% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1454 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- GLM-4.7: 26.4 (#96)
- Qwen3.6 Flash: —

| Benchmark | GLM-4.7 | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 33.4% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 2,377 | — |

## Reasoning

- GLM-4.7: 23.7 (#161)
- Qwen3.6 Flash: 28.4 (#90)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.7 | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| SimpleBench | 47.7% | 35.2% |
| Chess Puzzles | 6% | 20% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 143.53 | 143.26 |
| CritPt | 1.7% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1443 | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 18% |
| DTBench | — | 77.1% |
| LMCA | — | 31% |

## Math

- GLM-4.7: 37.7 (#92)
- Qwen3.6 Flash: 38.0 (#88)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.7 | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 83.3% | 84.4% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 2.4% | 10.3% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 0% | 0% |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 22.5% |
| ProofBench | 6% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1423 | — |

## Knowledge

- GLM-4.7: 47.0 (#74)
- Qwen3.6 Flash: 42.2 (#90)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.7 | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 83.3% | 83.3% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 32.2% | 15.9% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 11.7% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1424 | — |

## Multilingual

- GLM-4.7: 53.0 (#75)
- Qwen3.6 Flash: —

| Benchmark | GLM-4.7 | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1417 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1495 | — |
| LMArena French | 1432 | — |
| LMArena German | 1426 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1439 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1401 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1423 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1433 | — |

## Instruction Following

- GLM-4.7: 74.6 (#90)
- Qwen3.6 Flash: —

| Benchmark | GLM-4.7 | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1411 | — |

## Long Context

- GLM-4.7: 42.8 (#111)
- Qwen3.6 Flash: —

| Benchmark | GLM-4.7 | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| CL-bench | 15.9% | — |
| CL-bench Life | 10.9% | — |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1432 | — |

## Writing & Preference

- GLM-4.7: 61.1 (#89)
- Qwen3.6 Flash: —

| Benchmark | GLM-4.7 | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1436 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1401 | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1413 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1446 | — |

## FAQ

### Is GLM-4.7 better than Qwen3.6 Flash?

GLM-4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.7 to 38.4 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.6 Flash costs 2.4× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-4.7's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, GLM-4.7 or Qwen3.6 Flash?

Qwen3.6 Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.19 per million input tokens and $1.13 per million output tokens; GLM-4.7 lists at $0.60 and $2.20.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.6 Flash does, with 1M tokens against 205K.

### How many benchmarks do GLM-4.7 and Qwen3.6 Flash share?

9 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.7 has 36 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 Flash has 13.