Noometry

Model comparison

GLM-5.3-Flash vs Grok 4.7

Grok 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 53.1 to 51.8 on the Noometry Index. GLM-5.3-Flash costs 13× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.7's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 31 shared benchmarks.

GLM-5.3-Flash Z.ai (Zhipu)

51.8

Rank #41 Confirmed

Grok 4.7 xAI

53.1

Rank #37 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 31 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-5.3-Flash scores higher in 4 categories and Grok 4.7 in 6 categories; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in multimodal, where GLM-5.3-Flash leads 42.8 to 35.5.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is Chess Puzzles: 14% for GLM-5.3-Flash and 38% for Grok 4.7.
  • GLM-5.3-Flash is cheaper at $0.15 / $0.50 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $6 for Grok 4.7.
  • GLM-5.3-Flash accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 500K.
  • GLM-5.3-Flash has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GLM-5.3-FlashGrok 4.7
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)xAI
Noometry Index51.853.1
Released2026-08-202026-09-21
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window1M500K
Max output131K500K
Input $ / M tokens$0.15$2
Output $ / M tokens$0.50$6
Results tracked4039

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

Category by category

Coding Grok 4.7 leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 53.1 (#31), Grok 4.7: 58.0 (#18)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashGrok 4.7
FrontierCode31.8%47.6%
CursorBench36.8%46.3%
LMArena WebDev16091639
FrontierSWE18.1%29.5%
SciCode51.6%57.8%
LMArena Coding15081427
DeepSWE63.4%—
ALE-Bench303.55—

Agentic & Tool Use Grok 4.7 leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 34.2 (#47), Grok 4.7: 36.7 (#37)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashGrok 4.7
APEX-Agents52.8%54.6%
GDP.pdf14%22.8%
Vending-Bench 2—10,537

Reasoning Grok 4.7 leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 48.0 (#42), Grok 4.7: 49.1 (#40)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashGrok 4.7
CritPt15.4%18%
Chess Puzzles14%38%
LMArena Hard Prompts14911413
Mystery Game Puzzles8%29%
Epoch Capabilities Index151.88153.53
ARC-AGI-265.8%—
NYT Connections (extended)—76.8%
ARC-AGI-191%—
DTBench—96%
LMCA—49.4%
Surface Evolver Bench52.5%—
Bench to the Future 30.15—

Math Grok 4.7 leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 53.3 (#47), Grok 4.7: 57.8 (#39)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashGrok 4.7
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)55.8%53%
FrontierMath Tier 417.1%17.1%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202593.9%98.1%
ProofBench21%34%
LMArena Math15001407

Knowledge Grok 4.7 leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 58.4 (#36), Grok 4.7: 62.8 (#22)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashGrok 4.7
GPQA Diamond90.2%92.7%
LMArena Expert15131422
SimpleQA Verified—56%

Multimodal GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 42.8 (#27), Grok 4.7: 35.5 (#87)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashGrok 4.7
LMArena Vision12961228
Blueprint-Bench 2—32.5%
Furniture Assembly—20.8%

Multilingual GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 56.0 (#25), Grok 4.7: 50.8 (#116)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashGrok 4.7
LMArena Non-English14621389
LMArena Chinese15271455
LMArena French14961455
LMArena Russian14691397
LMArena Spanish14711400
LMArena German1470—
LMArena Japanese1429—
LMArena Korean1446—

Instruction Following GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 77.5 (#20), Grok 4.7: 74.1 (#105)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashGrok 4.7
LMArena Instruction Following14781404

Long Context GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 45.4 (#39), Grok 4.7: 43.1 (#104)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashGrok 4.7
LMArena Longer Query14821413

Writing & Preference Grok 4.7 leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 65.3 (#50), Grok 4.7: 70.0 (#24)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashGrok 4.7
LMArena Text14711399
LMArena Creative Writing14421391
LMArena Multi-Turn14671393
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—2007

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-5.3-Flash better than Grok 4.7?

Grok 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 53.1 to 51.8 on the Noometry Index. GLM-5.3-Flash costs 13× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.7's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, GLM-5.3-Flash or Grok 4.7?

GLM-5.3-Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.50 per million output tokens; Grok 4.7 lists at $2 and $6.

Is GLM-5.3-Flash or Grok 4.7 better for coding?

Grok 4.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 58.0 versus 53.1 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

GLM-5.3-Flash does, with 1M tokens against 500K.

How many benchmarks do GLM-5.3-Flash and Grok 4.7 share?

31 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5.3-Flash has 40 scored results on Noometry and Grok 4.7 has 39.

Related comparisons

Go deeper