Model comparison

GLM-4.7 vs Hunyuan Large 2025 02 10

GLM-4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.7 to 38.0 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.

GLM-4.7 Z.ai (Zhipu)

41.7

Rank #117 Confirmed

Hunyuan Large 2025 02 10 Tencent

38.0

Rank #183 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.7 scores higher in 7 categories and Hunyuan Large 2025 02 10 in 1 category; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where GLM-4.7 leads 47.0 to 34.5.
  • GLM-4.7 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GLM-4.7 and Hunyuan Large 2025 02 10 specifications
GLM-4.7Hunyuan Large 2025 02 10
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)Tencent
Noometry Index41.738.0
Released2025-12-22—
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window205K—
Max output131K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.60—
Output $ / M tokens$2.20—
Results tracked3612

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

Category by category

Coding GLM-4.7 leads

GLM-4.7: 43.6 (#74), Hunyuan Large 2025 02 10: 37.6 (#177)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Hunyuan Large 2025 02 10
LMArena Coding14541307
LMArena WebDev1435—
SciCode45.1%—
ALE-Bench399.48—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GLM-4.7: 26.4 (#96), Hunyuan Large 2025 02 10: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Hunyuan Large 2025 02 10
Terminal-Bench33.4%—
Vending-Bench 22,377—

Reasoning Too close to call

GLM-4.7: 23.7 (#161), Hunyuan Large 2025 02 10: 24.5 (#147)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Hunyuan Large 2025 02 10
LMArena Hard Prompts14431286
SimpleBench47.7%—
CritPt1.7%—
Chess Puzzles6%—
Epoch Capabilities Index143.53—

Math GLM-4.7 leads

GLM-4.7: 37.7 (#92), Hunyuan Large 2025 02 10: 33.1 (#178)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Hunyuan Large 2025 02 10
LMArena Math14231281
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202583.3%—
ProofBench6%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)2.4%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)0%—

Knowledge GLM-4.7 leads

GLM-4.7: 47.0 (#74), Hunyuan Large 2025 02 10: 34.5 (#188)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Hunyuan Large 2025 02 10
LMArena Expert14241276
GPQA Diamond83.3%—
SimpleQA Verified32.2%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate11.7%—

Multilingual GLM-4.7 leads

GLM-4.7: 53.0 (#75), Hunyuan Large 2025 02 10: 42.1 (#195)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Hunyuan Large 2025 02 10
LMArena Non-English14171265
LMArena Chinese14951346
LMArena Russian14231266
LMArena French1432—
LMArena German1426—
LMArena Japanese1439—
LMArena Korean1401—
LMArena Spanish1433—

Instruction Following GLM-4.7 leads

GLM-4.7: 74.6 (#90), Hunyuan Large 2025 02 10: 67.6 (#192)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Hunyuan Large 2025 02 10
LMArena Instruction Following14111277

Long Context GLM-4.7 leads

GLM-4.7: 42.8 (#111), Hunyuan Large 2025 02 10: 40.8 (#144)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Hunyuan Large 2025 02 10
LMArena Longer Query14321342
CL-bench15.9%—
CL-bench Life10.9%—

Writing & Preference GLM-4.7 leads

GLM-4.7: 61.1 (#89), Hunyuan Large 2025 02 10: 48.9 (#191)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Hunyuan Large 2025 02 10
LMArena Text14361288
LMArena Creative Writing14011264
LMArena Multi-Turn14461284
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1413—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-4.7 better than Hunyuan Large 2025 02 10?

GLM-4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.7 to 38.0 on the Noometry Index.

Is GLM-4.7 or Hunyuan Large 2025 02 10 better for coding?

GLM-4.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 43.6 versus 37.6 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do GLM-4.7 and Hunyuan Large 2025 02 10 share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.7 has 36 scored results on Noometry and Hunyuan Large 2025 02 10 has 12.

Related comparisons

Go deeper