Model comparison

GLM-4.7-Flash vs Step 3.7 Flash

GLM-4.7-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.4 to 36.5 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified October 10, 2026. 0 shared benchmarks.

GLM-4.7-Flash Z.ai (Zhipu)

38.4

Rank #175 Confirmed

Step 3.7 Flash

StepFun

36.5

Rank #207 Reported

Summary

The widest gap is in math, where Step 3.7 Flash leads 40.9 to 34.4.
GLM-4.7-Flash is cheaper at $0.06 / $0.40 per million input/output tokens, against $0.18 / $1.11 for Step 3.7 Flash.
Step 3.7 Flash accepts more context: 256K tokens versus 200K.

Side by side

GLM-4.7-Flash and Step 3.7 Flash specifications
	GLM-4.7-Flash	Step 3.7 Flash
Provider	Z.ai (Zhipu)	StepFun
Noometry Index	38.4	36.5
Released	2026-01-19	2026-05-29
Weights	Open	Open
Context window	200K	256K
Max output	131K	256K
Input $ / M tokens	$0.06	$0.18
Output $ / M tokens	$0.40	$1.11
Results tracked	21	5

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 3.7 Flash: 39.4 (#147)

Coding benchmarks
Benchmark	GLM-4.7-Flash	Step 3.7 Flash
SciCode	—	40%
LMArena Coding	1383	—
ALE-Bench	—	694.12

Reasoning Too close to call

GLM-4.7-Flash: 20.2 (#224), Step 3.7 Flash: 20.9 (#211)

Reasoning benchmarks
Benchmark	GLM-4.7-Flash	Step 3.7 Flash
NYT Connections (extended)	—	39.7%
CritPt	—	2.3%
Chess Puzzles	0%	—
LMArena Hard Prompts	1356	—

Math Step 3.7 Flash leads

GLM-4.7-Flash: 34.4 (#159), Step 3.7 Flash: 40.9 (#74)

Math benchmarks
Benchmark	GLM-4.7-Flash	Step 3.7 Flash
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions	—	68.5%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025	58.3%	—
LMArena Math	1354	—

Knowledge Not comparable

GLM-4.7-Flash: 35.4 (#177), Step 3.7 Flash: —

Knowledge benchmarks
Benchmark	GLM-4.7-Flash	Step 3.7 Flash
GPQA Diamond	60.5%	—
Vectara Hallucination Rate	9.3%	—
LMArena Expert	1357	—

Multilingual Not comparable

GLM-4.7-Flash: 46.8 (#152), Step 3.7 Flash: —

Multilingual benchmarks
Benchmark	GLM-4.7-Flash	Step 3.7 Flash
LMArena Non-English	1331	—
LMArena Chinese	1403	—
LMArena French	1332	—
LMArena German	1336	—
LMArena Korean	1284	—
LMArena Russian	1333	—
LMArena Spanish	1351	—

Instruction Following Not comparable

GLM-4.7-Flash: 70.3 (#162), Step 3.7 Flash: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
Benchmark	GLM-4.7-Flash	Step 3.7 Flash
LMArena Instruction Following	1327	—

Long Context Not comparable

GLM-4.7-Flash: 40.9 (#143), Step 3.7 Flash: —

Long Context benchmarks
Benchmark	GLM-4.7-Flash	Step 3.7 Flash
LMArena Longer Query	1345	—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

GLM-4.7-Flash: 47.7 (#206), Step 3.7 Flash: —

Writing & Preference benchmarks
Benchmark	GLM-4.7-Flash	Step 3.7 Flash
LMArena Text	1351	—
LMArena Creative Writing	1297	—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing	1125	—
LMArena Multi-Turn	1342	—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-4.7-Flash better than Step 3.7 Flash?

GLM-4.7-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.4 to 36.5 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, GLM-4.7-Flash or Step 3.7 Flash?

GLM-4.7-Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.06 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; Step 3.7 Flash lists at $0.18 and $1.11.

Is GLM-4.7-Flash or Step 3.7 Flash better for coding?

They score almost the same on coding (40.0 vs 39.4); test both on your own repository before choosing.

Which has the bigger context window?

Step 3.7 Flash does, with 256K tokens against 200K.

How many benchmarks do GLM-4.7-Flash and Step 3.7 Flash share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.7-Flash has 21 scored results on Noometry and Step 3.7 Flash has 5.