Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4 vs GLM-4.7

Claude Opus 4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.9 to 41.7 on the Noometry Index. GLM-4.7 costs 30× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 26 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4 Anthropic

42.9

Rank #93 Confirmed

GLM-4.7 Z.ai (Zhipu)

41.7

Rank #117 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 26 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4 scores higher in 6 categories and GLM-4.7 in 3 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in agentic & tool use, where Claude Opus 4 leads 34.5 to 26.4.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 64.4% for Claude Opus 4 and 83.3% for GLM-4.7.
  • GLM-4.7 is cheaper at $0.60 / $2.20 per million input/output tokens, against $15 / $75 for Claude Opus 4.
  • GLM-4.7 accepts more context: 205K tokens versus 200K.
  • GLM-4.7 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4GLM-4.7
ProviderAnthropicZ.ai (Zhipu)
Noometry Index42.941.7
Released2025-05-222025-12-22
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window200K205K
Max output32K131K
Input $ / M tokens$15$0.60
Output $ / M tokens$75$2.20
Results tracked5636

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Claude Opus 4 leads

Claude Opus 4: 47.8 (#55), GLM-4.7: 43.6 (#74)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4GLM-4.7
LMArena Coding14421454
SWE-bench Verified70.7%—
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)67.6%—
Aider Polyglot72%—
LMArena WebDev—1435
SciCode—45.1%
GSO6.9%—
WeirdML43.7%—
ALE-Bench—399.48
AlgoTune1.33—

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 4 leads

Claude Opus 4: 34.5 (#39), GLM-4.7: 26.4 (#96)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4GLM-4.7
Terminal-Bench—33.4%
Cybench38%—
DeepResearch Bench46.8%—
LMArena Search1127—
METR Time Horizons63.9%—
Vending-Bench 2—2,377

Reasoning Claude Opus 4 leads

Claude Opus 4: 27.4 (#104), GLM-4.7: 23.7 (#161)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4GLM-4.7
SimpleBench58.8%47.7%
CritPt0.3%1.7%
LMArena Hard Prompts13991443
Epoch Capabilities Index142.67143.53
ARC-AGI-28.6%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark74.3%—
ARC-AGI-135.7%—
Chess Puzzles—6%
EnigmaEval5.6%—
DTBench81.6%—
LMCA37.4%—
ForecastBench61.1—

Math Claude Opus 4 leads

Claude Opus 4: 40.2 (#80), GLM-4.7: 37.7 (#92)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4GLM-4.7
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202564.4%83.3%
LMArena Math13911423
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)4.5%2.4%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)4.2%0%
ProofBench—6%
Omni-MATH61.6%—
MATH Level 585%—

Knowledge GLM-4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4: 43.9 (#82), GLM-4.7: 47.0 (#74)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4GLM-4.7
GPQA Diamond76.3%83.3%
Vectara Hallucination Rate12%11.7%
LMArena Expert13841424
Humanity's Last Exam10.7%—
SimpleQA Verified—32.2%
MMLU-Pro87.5%—
Confabulations15.9%—
GPQA (HELM)70.8%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 4: 30.9 (#101), GLM-4.7: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4GLM-4.7
LMArena Vision1192—
GeoBench49%—
VPCT38%—

Multilingual GLM-4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4: 49.0 (#133), GLM-4.7: 53.0 (#75)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4GLM-4.7
LMArena Non-English13621417
LMArena Chinese13861495
LMArena French13701432
LMArena German13911426
LMArena Japanese13321439
LMArena Korean13181401
LMArena Russian13921423
LMArena Spanish13881433

Instruction Following Claude Opus 4 leads

Claude Opus 4: 77.3 (#26), GLM-4.7: 74.6 (#90)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4GLM-4.7
LMArena Instruction Following14061411
IFEval91.8%—

Long Context GLM-4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4: 39.5 (#167), GLM-4.7: 42.8 (#111)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4GLM-4.7
LMArena Longer Query14221432
Fiction.LiveBench61.1%—
CL-bench—15.9%
CL-bench Life—10.9%

Writing & Preference Too close to call

Claude Opus 4: 61.4 (#85), GLM-4.7: 61.1 (#89)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4GLM-4.7
LMArena Text13771436
LMArena Creative Writing13861401
EQ-Bench Creative Writing15801413
LMArena Multi-Turn13961446
Short-Story Creative Writing83.6%—
WildBench85.2%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4 better than GLM-4.7?

Claude Opus 4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.9 to 41.7 on the Noometry Index. GLM-4.7 costs 30× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4 or GLM-4.7?

GLM-4.7 is cheaper. It lists at $0.60 per million input tokens and $2.20 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4 lists at $15 and $75.

Is Claude Opus 4 or GLM-4.7 better for coding?

Claude Opus 4 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 47.8 versus 43.6 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

GLM-4.7 does, with 205K tokens against 200K.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4 and GLM-4.7 share?

26 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4 has 56 scored results on Noometry and GLM-4.7 has 36.

Related comparisons

Go deeper