Model comparison
GLM-4.7 vs GPT-5.4 nano
GLM-4.7 and GPT-5.4 nano score almost the same on the Noometry Index (42.0 vs 41.9), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Last verified . 29 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 29 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.7 scores higher in 7 categories and GPT-5.4 nano in 1 category; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where GLM-4.7 leads 60.9 to 55.7.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Chess Puzzles: 6% for GLM-4.7 and 30% for GPT-5.4 nano.
- GPT-5.4 nano is cheaper at $0.20 / $1.25 per million input/output tokens, against $0.60 / $2.20 for GLM-4.7.
- GPT-5.4 nano accepts more context: 400K tokens versus 205K.
- GLM-4.7 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| GLM-4.7 | GPT-5.4 nano | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | OpenAI |
| Noometry Index | 42.0 | 41.9 |
| Released | 2025-12-22 | 2026-03-17 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 205K | 400K |
| Max output | 131K | 128K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.60 | $0.20 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $2.20 | $1.25 |
| Results tracked | 36 | 40 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Too close to call
GLM-4.7: 44.0 (#79), GPT-5.4 nano: 43.6 (#84)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7 | GPT-5.4 nano |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 45.1% | 46.9% |
| LMArena Coding | 1454 | 1405 |
| ALE-Bench | 399.48 | 1,005 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1435 | — |
| WeirdML | — | 49.2% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
GLM-4.7: 26.5 (#103), GPT-5.4 nano: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7 | GPT-5.4 nano |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 33.4% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 2,377 | — |
Reasoning Too close to call
GLM-4.7: 24.3 (#164), GPT-5.4 nano: 23.7 (#173)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7 | GPT-5.4 nano |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 1.7% | 9.3% |
| Chess Puzzles | 6% | 30% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1443 | 1381 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 143.51 | 145.81 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 5.7% |
| SimpleBench | 47.7% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 39.7% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 51.5% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 9% |
| DTBench | — | 80.3% |
| LMCA | — | 36.9% |
| ForecastBench | — | 57.3 |
Math GPT-5.4 nano leads
GLM-4.7: 38.6 (#135), GPT-5.4 nano: 40.9 (#88)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7 | GPT-5.4 nano |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 83.3% | 87.8% |
| ProofBench | 6% | 5% |
| LMArena Math | 1423 | 1406 |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 2.4% | 25.9% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 0% | 6.3% |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 44.9% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 12.2% |
Knowledge GLM-4.7 leads
GLM-4.7: 47.0 (#80), GPT-5.4 nano: 41.9 (#103)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7 | GPT-5.4 nano |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 83.3% | 78.5% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 32.2% | 11.7% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 11.7% | 3.1% |
| LMArena Expert | 1424 | 1396 |
Multimodal Not comparable
GLM-4.7: —, GPT-5.4 nano: 36.7 (#78)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7 | GPT-5.4 nano |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1196 |
Multilingual GLM-4.7 leads
GLM-4.7: 52.8 (#79), GPT-5.4 nano: 48.6 (#140)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7 | GPT-5.4 nano |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1417 | 1359 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1495 | 1392 |
| LMArena French | 1432 | 1396 |
| LMArena German | 1424 | 1367 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1439 | 1343 |
| LMArena Korean | 1399 | 1320 |
| LMArena Russian | 1423 | 1363 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1434 | 1371 |
Instruction Following GLM-4.7 leads
GLM-4.7: 74.4 (#95), GPT-5.4 nano: 71.9 (#144)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7 | GPT-5.4 nano |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1411 | 1362 |
Long Context GLM-4.7 leads
GLM-4.7: 42.8 (#116), GPT-5.4 nano: 41.6 (#137)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7 | GPT-5.4 nano |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1432 | 1366 |
| CL-bench | 15.9% | — |
| CL-bench Life | 10.9% | — |
Writing & Preference GLM-4.7 leads
GLM-4.7: 60.9 (#93), GPT-5.4 nano: 55.7 (#142)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7 | GPT-5.4 nano |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1435 | 1372 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1401 | 1314 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1446 | 1382 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1413 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is GLM-4.7 better than GPT-5.4 nano?
GLM-4.7 and GPT-5.4 nano score almost the same on the Noometry Index (42.0 vs 41.9), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Which is cheaper, GLM-4.7 or GPT-5.4 nano?
GPT-5.4 nano is cheaper. It lists at $0.20 per million input tokens and $1.25 per million output tokens; GLM-4.7 lists at $0.60 and $2.20.
Is GLM-4.7 or GPT-5.4 nano better for coding?
They score almost the same on coding (44.0 vs 43.6); test both on your own repository before choosing.
Which has the bigger context window?
GPT-5.4 nano does, with 400K tokens against 205K.
How many benchmarks do GLM-4.7 and GPT-5.4 nano share?
29 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.7 has 36 scored results on Noometry and GPT-5.4 nano has 40.