Model comparison
GLM-4.7-Flash vs Step 3
Step 3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.9 to 38.4 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 15 shared benchmarks.
StepFunSummary
- They share 15 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.7-Flash scores higher in 3 categories and Step 3 in 5 categories; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Step 3 leads 27.6 to 20.2.
Side by side
| GLM-4.7-Flash | Step 3 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | StepFun |
| Noometry Index | 38.4 | 39.9 |
| Released | 2026-01-19 | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 200K | — |
| Max output | 131K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.06 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.40 | — |
| Results tracked | 21 | 17 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Too close to call
GLM-4.7-Flash: 40.0 (#133), Step 3: 39.5 (#144)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Step 3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1383 | 1367 |
Reasoning Step 3 leads
GLM-4.7-Flash: 20.2 (#224), Step 3: 27.6 (#102)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Step 3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1356 | 1355 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 62.3% |
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | — |
Math Too close to call
GLM-4.7-Flash: 34.4 (#159), Step 3: 34.9 (#148)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Step 3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1354 | 1366 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 58.3% | — |
Knowledge Too close to call
GLM-4.7-Flash: 35.4 (#177), Step 3: 36.2 (#161)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Step 3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1357 | 1333 |
| GPQA Diamond | 60.5% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 9.3% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
GLM-4.7-Flash: —, Step 3: 34.9 (#81)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Step 3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1176 |
Multilingual Too close to call
GLM-4.7-Flash: 46.8 (#152), Step 3: 46.5 (#154)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Step 3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1331 | 1327 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1403 | 1396 |
| LMArena German | 1336 | 1371 |
| LMArena Korean | 1284 | 1271 |
| LMArena Russian | 1333 | 1331 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1351 | 1372 |
| LMArena French | 1332 | — |
Instruction Following Too close to call
GLM-4.7-Flash: 70.3 (#162), Step 3: 70.6 (#159)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Step 3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1327 | 1332 |
Long Context Too close to call
GLM-4.7-Flash: 40.9 (#143), Step 3: 40.3 (#152)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Step 3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1345 | 1326 |
Writing & Preference Step 3 leads
GLM-4.7-Flash: 47.7 (#206), Step 3: 54.5 (#146)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7-Flash | Step 3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1351 | 1351 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1297 | 1322 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1342 | 1340 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1125 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is GLM-4.7-Flash better than Step 3?
Step 3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.9 to 38.4 on the Noometry Index.
Is GLM-4.7-Flash or Step 3 better for coding?
They score almost the same on coding (40.0 vs 39.5); test both on your own repository before choosing.
How many benchmarks do GLM-4.7-Flash and Step 3 share?
15 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.7-Flash has 21 scored results on Noometry and Step 3 has 17.