Noometry

Model comparison

Gemma 3n E4b IT vs GLM-4.7-Flash

GLM-4.7-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.4 to 36.7 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3n E4b IT costs 1.9× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-4.7-Flash's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 16 shared benchmarks.

Gemma 3n E4b IT Google

36.7

Rank #203 Confirmed

GLM-4.7-Flash Z.ai (Zhipu)

38.4

Rank #175 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 16 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 3n E4b IT scores higher in 1 category and GLM-4.7-Flash in 7 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in instruction following, where GLM-4.7-Flash leads 70.3 to 66.3.
  • Gemma 3n E4b IT is cheaper at $0.06 / $0.12 per million input/output tokens, against $0.06 / $0.40 for GLM-4.7-Flash.
  • GLM-4.7-Flash accepts more context: 200K tokens versus 33K.

Side by side

Gemma 3n E4b ITGLM-4.7-Flash
ProviderGoogleZ.ai (Zhipu)
Noometry Index36.738.4
Released2025-05-202026-01-19
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window33K200K
Max output33K131K
Input $ / M tokens$0.06$0.06
Output $ / M tokens$0.12$0.40
Results tracked1821

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

Category by category

Coding GLM-4.7-Flash leads

Gemma 3n E4b IT: 36.4 (#193), GLM-4.7-Flash: 40.0 (#133)

BenchmarkGemma 3n E4b ITGLM-4.7-Flash
LMArena Coding12691383

Reasoning Too close to call

Gemma 3n E4b IT: 19.2 (#239), GLM-4.7-Flash: 20.2 (#224)

BenchmarkGemma 3n E4b ITGLM-4.7-Flash
LMArena Hard Prompts12841356
Kagi LLM Benchmark31.5%—
Chess Puzzles—0%

Math GLM-4.7-Flash leads

Gemma 3n E4b IT: 32.5 (#186), GLM-4.7-Flash: 34.4 (#159)

BenchmarkGemma 3n E4b ITGLM-4.7-Flash
LMArena Math12511354
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—58.3%

Knowledge GLM-4.7-Flash leads

Gemma 3n E4b IT: 33.6 (#193), GLM-4.7-Flash: 35.4 (#177)

BenchmarkGemma 3n E4b ITGLM-4.7-Flash
LMArena Expert12451357
GPQA Diamond—60.5%
Vectara Hallucination Rate—9.3%

Multilingual GLM-4.7-Flash leads

Gemma 3n E4b IT: 43.5 (#179), GLM-4.7-Flash: 46.8 (#152)

BenchmarkGemma 3n E4b ITGLM-4.7-Flash
LMArena Non-English12851331
LMArena Chinese13101403
LMArena French13301332
LMArena German13121336
LMArena Korean12591284
LMArena Russian12881333
LMArena Spanish13051351
LMArena Japanese1274—

Instruction Following GLM-4.7-Flash leads

Gemma 3n E4b IT: 66.3 (#205), GLM-4.7-Flash: 70.3 (#162)

BenchmarkGemma 3n E4b ITGLM-4.7-Flash
LMArena Instruction Following12551327

Long Context GLM-4.7-Flash leads

Gemma 3n E4b IT: 38.8 (#185), GLM-4.7-Flash: 40.9 (#143)

BenchmarkGemma 3n E4b ITGLM-4.7-Flash
LMArena Longer Query12771345

Writing & Preference Gemma 3n E4b IT leads

Gemma 3n E4b IT: 50.3 (#181), GLM-4.7-Flash: 47.7 (#206)

BenchmarkGemma 3n E4b ITGLM-4.7-Flash
LMArena Text13061351
LMArena Creative Writing12871297
LMArena Multi-Turn12761342
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—1125

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemma 3n E4b IT better than GLM-4.7-Flash?

GLM-4.7-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.4 to 36.7 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3n E4b IT costs 1.9× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-4.7-Flash's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Gemma 3n E4b IT or GLM-4.7-Flash?

Gemma 3n E4b IT is cheaper. It lists at $0.06 per million input tokens and $0.12 per million output tokens; GLM-4.7-Flash lists at $0.06 and $0.40.

Is Gemma 3n E4b IT or GLM-4.7-Flash better for coding?

GLM-4.7-Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.0 versus 36.4 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 Gemma 3n E4b IT and GLM-4.7-Flash share?

16 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 3n E4b IT has 18 scored results on Noometry and GLM-4.7-Flash has 21.

Related comparisons

Go deeper