# GLM-4.7 vs Qwen3.7 Plus

> Qwen3.7 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.3 to 42.0 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/glm-4-7-vs-qwen3-7-plus
- Last updated: 2026-10-12
- Shared benchmarks: 23

## Summary

- They share 23 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.7 scores higher in 2 categories and Qwen3.7 Plus in 7 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen3.7 Plus leads 39.3 to 24.3.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Chess Puzzles: 6% for GLM-4.7 and 24% for Qwen3.7 Plus.
- Qwen3.7 Plus is cheaper at $0.40 / $1.60 per million input/output tokens, against $0.60 / $2.20 for GLM-4.7.
- Qwen3.7 Plus accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 205K.
- GLM-4.7 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | GLM-4.7 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 42.0 | 45.3 |
| Rank | 124 | 72 |
| Context | 205K | 1M |
| Input $/M | $0.60 | $0.40 |
| Output $/M | $2.20 | $1.60 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |

## Coding

- GLM-4.7: 44.0 (#79)
- Qwen3.7 Plus: 36.6 (#206)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.7 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 45.1% | 45.5% |
| LMArena Coding | 1454 | 1473 |
| FrontierCode | — | 10.2% |
| LMArena WebDev | 1435 | — |
| ALE-Bench | 399.48 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- GLM-4.7: 26.5 (#103)
- Qwen3.7 Plus: 21.4 (#138)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.7 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 33.4% | — |
| OSWorld 2.0 | — | 2.8% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 2,377 | — |

## Reasoning

- GLM-4.7: 24.3 (#164)
- Qwen3.7 Plus: 39.3 (#59)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.7 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 1.7% | 9.1% |
| Chess Puzzles | 6% | 24% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1443 | 1460 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 143.51 | 147.37 |
| SimpleBench | 47.7% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 74.8% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 17% |
| DTBench | — | 84% |
| LMCA | — | 37.6% |

## Math

- GLM-4.7: 38.6 (#135)
- Qwen3.7 Plus: 50.5 (#56)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.7 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 83.3% | 93.3% |
| LMArena Math | 1423 | 1466 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 34.4% |
| ProofBench | 6% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 2.4% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 0% | — |

## Knowledge

- GLM-4.7: 47.0 (#80)
- Qwen3.7 Plus: 54.9 (#51)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.7 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 83.3% | 87.9% |
| LMArena Expert | 1424 | 1467 |
| SimpleQA Verified | 32.2% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 11.7% | — |

## Multimodal

- GLM-4.7: —
- Qwen3.7 Plus: 41.8 (#33)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.7 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1279 |
| LMArena Document | — | 1444 |

## Multilingual

- GLM-4.7: 52.8 (#79)
- Qwen3.7 Plus: 54.8 (#38)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.7 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1417 | 1445 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1495 | 1510 |
| LMArena French | 1432 | 1473 |
| LMArena German | 1424 | 1471 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1439 | 1413 |
| LMArena Korean | 1399 | 1415 |
| LMArena Russian | 1423 | 1457 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1434 | 1457 |

## Instruction Following

- GLM-4.7: 74.4 (#95)
- Qwen3.7 Plus: 75.8 (#52)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.7 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1411 | 1440 |

## Long Context

- GLM-4.7: 42.8 (#116)
- Qwen3.7 Plus: 44.5 (#65)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.7 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1432 | 1455 |
| CL-bench | 15.9% | — |
| CL-bench Life | 10.9% | — |

## Writing & Preference

- GLM-4.7: 60.9 (#93)
- Qwen3.7 Plus: 64.3 (#56)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.7 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1435 | 1455 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1401 | 1439 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1446 | 1460 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1413 | — |

## FAQ

### Is GLM-4.7 better than Qwen3.7 Plus?

Qwen3.7 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.3 to 42.0 on the Noometry Index.

### Which is cheaper, GLM-4.7 or Qwen3.7 Plus?

Qwen3.7 Plus is cheaper. It lists at $0.40 per million input tokens and $1.60 per million output tokens; GLM-4.7 lists at $0.60 and $2.20.

### Is GLM-4.7 or Qwen3.7 Plus better for coding?

GLM-4.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 44.0 versus 36.6 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.7 Plus does, with 1M tokens against 205K.

### How many benchmarks do GLM-4.7 and Qwen3.7 Plus share?

23 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.7 has 36 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.7 Plus has 32.