Model comparison
GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen2.5 Plus 1127
GLM-4.7-Flash and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 score almost the same on the Noometry Index (38.8 vs 38.8), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Last verified . 13 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.7-Flash scores higher in 5 categories and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 in 3 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 leads 25.9 to 20.9.
- GLM-4.7-Flash has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| GLM-4.7-Flash | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 38.8 | 38.8 |
| Released | 2026-01-19 | — |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 200K | — |
| Max output | 131K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.06 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.40 | — |
| Results tracked | 21 | 14 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GLM-4.7-Flash leads
GLM-4.7-Flash: 40.6 (#135), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 38.5 (#175)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1383 | 1314 |
Reasoning Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 leads
GLM-4.7-Flash: 20.9 (#229), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 25.9 (#141)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1356 | 1299 |
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | — |
Math Too close to call
GLM-4.7-Flash: 36.1 (#173), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 36.1 (#174)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1355 | 1298 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 58.3% | — |
Knowledge Too close to call
GLM-4.7-Flash: 35.5 (#184), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 35.5 (#183)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1357 | 1289 |
| GPQA Diamond | 60.5% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 9.3% | — |
Multilingual GLM-4.7-Flash leads
GLM-4.7-Flash: 46.5 (#158), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 41.9 (#201)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1330 | 1265 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1403 | 1314 |
| LMArena German | 1337 | 1231 |
| LMArena Russian | 1332 | 1271 |
| LMArena French | 1332 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1207 |
| LMArena Korean | 1283 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1350 | — |
Instruction Following GLM-4.7-Flash leads
GLM-4.7-Flash: 70.1 (#167), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 67.2 (#199)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1327 | 1275 |
Long Context GLM-4.7-Flash leads
GLM-4.7-Flash: 40.9 (#148), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 39.2 (#184)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1345 | 1292 |
Writing & Preference Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 leads
GLM-4.7-Flash: 47.4 (#210), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 49.4 (#192)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1351 | 1299 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1297 | 1262 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1342 | 1299 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1125 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is GLM-4.7-Flash better than Qwen2.5 Plus 1127?
GLM-4.7-Flash and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 score almost the same on the Noometry Index (38.8 vs 38.8), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Is GLM-4.7-Flash or Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 better for coding?
GLM-4.7-Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.6 versus 38.5 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do GLM-4.7-Flash and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 share?
13 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.7-Flash has 21 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 has 14.