Compare · ModelsLive · 3 picked · head to head
GLM 5 vs Step 3.5 Flash vs GLM 4.7
Side by side · benchmarks, pricing, and signals you can act on.
Winner summary
GLM 5 wins on 22/24 benchmarks
GLM 5 wins 22 of 24 shared benchmarks. Leads in arena · math · knowledge.
Category leads
arena·GLM 5math·GLM 5knowledge·GLM 5language·GLM 5coding·GLM 5reasoning·GLM 5
Hype vs Reality
Attention vs performance
GLM 5
#55 by perf·#27 by attention
Step 3.5 Flash
#9 by perf·#11 by attention
GLM 4.7
#93 by perf·no signal
Best value
Step 3.5 Flash
8.1x better value than GLM 4.7
GLM 5
45.7 pts/$
$1.26/M
Step 3.5 Flash
384.5 pts/$
$0.20/M
GLM 4.7
47.6 pts/$
$1.06/M
Vendor risk
Mixed exposure
One or more vendors flagged
z-ai
private · undisclosed
StepFun
$5.0B·Tier 1
z-ai
private · undisclosed
Head to head
24 benchmarks · 3 models
GLM 5Step 3.5 FlashGLM 4.7
Chatbot Arena Elo · Overall
GLM 5 leads by +12.9
GLM 5
1455.6
Step 3.5 Flash
1391.4
GLM 4.7
1442.7
OpenCompass · AIME2025
GLM 5 leads by +0.1
GLM 5
95.8
Step 3.5 Flash
95.7
GLM 4.7
95.4
OpenCompass · GPQA-Diamond
GLM 4.7 leads by +1.6
GLM 5
85.3
Step 3.5 Flash
83.7
GLM 4.7
86.9
OpenCompass · HLE
GLM 5 leads by +2.7
GLM 5
28.1
Step 3.5 Flash
21.6
GLM 4.7
25.4
OpenCompass · IFEval
GLM 5
93.2
Step 3.5 Flash
93.2
GLM 4.7
90.2
OpenCompass · LiveCodeBenchV6
GLM 5 leads by +2.3
GLM 5
86.2
Step 3.5 Flash
83.9
GLM 4.7
83.8
OpenCompass · MMLU-Pro
GLM 5 leads by +1.2
GLM 5
85.2
Step 3.5 Flash
83.5
GLM 4.7
84.0
Chatbot Arena Elo · Coding
GLM 5 leads by +1.8
GLM 5
1441.0
GLM 4.7
1439.2
Chess Puzzles
GLM 5 leads by +4.0
Chess Puzzles · tests strategic and tactical reasoning by having models solve chess puzzle positions, evaluating lookahead and pattern recognition abilities.
GLM 5
10.0
GLM 4.7
6.0
FrontierMath-2025-02-28-Private
GLM 5 leads by +14.0
FrontierMath (Feb 2025) · original research-level math problems created by mathematicians, testing capabilities at the boundary of current AI mathematical reasoning.
GLM 5
16.4
GLM 4.7
2.4
FrontierMath-Tier-4-2025-07-01-Private
GLM 5 leads by +2.0
FrontierMath Tier 4 (Jul 2025) · the most challenging tier of frontier mathematics, containing problems that push the absolute limits of AI mathematical reasoning.
GLM 5
2.1
GLM 4.7
0.1
GPQA diamond
GLM 5 leads by +6.0
Graduate-Level Google-Proof QA (Diamond set) · expert-crafted questions in physics, biology, and chemistry that are difficult even for domain PhDs.
GLM 5
83.8
GLM 4.7
77.8
LiveBench · Agentic Coding
GLM 5 leads by +13.3
GLM 5
55.0
GLM 4.7
41.7
LiveBench · Coding
GLM 5 leads by +0.5
GLM 5
73.6
GLM 4.7
73.1
LiveBench · Data Analysis
GLM 5 leads by +12.7
GLM 5
67.9
GLM 4.7
55.2
LiveBench · If
GLM 5 leads by +19.7
GLM 5
55.3
GLM 4.7
35.7
LiveBench · Language
GLM 5 leads by +12.3
GLM 5
77.5
GLM 4.7
65.2
LiveBench · Mathematics
GLM 5 leads by +7.4
GLM 5
83.5
GLM 4.7
76.0
LiveBench · Overall
GLM 5 leads by +10.8
GLM 5
68.8
GLM 4.7
58.1
LiveBench · Reasoning
GLM 5 leads by +9.4
GLM 5
69.1
GLM 4.7
59.7
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025
GLM 4.7 leads by +3.3
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 · simulated American Invitational Mathematics Examination problems testing advanced problem-solving skills.
GLM 5
80.0
GLM 4.7
83.3
PostTrainBench
GLM 5 leads by +6.4
GLM 5
13.9
GLM 4.7
7.5
SimpleBench
GLM 5 leads by +6.6
SimpleBench · tests fundamental reasoning capabilities with straightforward problems designed to expose gaps in basic logical and spatial thinking.
GLM 5
43.8
GLM 4.7
37.2
Terminal Bench
GLM 5 leads by +19.0
Terminal-Bench 2.0 · evaluates AI agents on real terminal-based coding tasks · writing scripts, debugging, running tests, and managing projects entirely through command-line interaction. Tests both code quality and terminal fluency. Claude Opus 4.7 scores 69.4%, demonstrating significant agentic terminal competence.
GLM 5
52.4
GLM 4.7
33.4
Full benchmark table
| Benchmark | GLM 5 | Step 3.5 Flash | GLM 4.7 |
|---|---|---|---|
Chatbot Arena Elo · Overall | 1455.6 | 1391.4 | 1442.7 |
OpenCompass · AIME2025 | 95.8 | 95.7 | 95.4 |
OpenCompass · GPQA-Diamond | 85.3 | 83.7 | 86.9 |
OpenCompass · HLE | 28.1 | 21.6 | 25.4 |
OpenCompass · IFEval | 93.2 | 93.2 | 90.2 |
OpenCompass · LiveCodeBenchV6 | 86.2 | 83.9 | 83.8 |
OpenCompass · MMLU-Pro | 85.2 | 83.5 | 84.0 |
Chatbot Arena Elo · Coding | 1441.0 | — | 1439.2 |
Chess Puzzles Chess Puzzles · tests strategic and tactical reasoning by having models solve chess puzzle positions, evaluating lookahead and pattern recognition abilities. | 10.0 | — | 6.0 |
FrontierMath-2025-02-28-Private FrontierMath (Feb 2025) · original research-level math problems created by mathematicians, testing capabilities at the boundary of current AI mathematical reasoning. | 16.4 | — | 2.4 |
FrontierMath-Tier-4-2025-07-01-Private FrontierMath Tier 4 (Jul 2025) · the most challenging tier of frontier mathematics, containing problems that push the absolute limits of AI mathematical reasoning. | 2.1 | — | 0.1 |
GPQA diamond Graduate-Level Google-Proof QA (Diamond set) · expert-crafted questions in physics, biology, and chemistry that are difficult even for domain PhDs. | 83.8 | — | 77.8 |
LiveBench · Agentic Coding | 55.0 | — | 41.7 |
LiveBench · Coding | 73.6 | — | 73.1 |
LiveBench · Data Analysis | 67.9 | — | 55.2 |
LiveBench · If | 55.3 | — | 35.7 |
LiveBench · Language | 77.5 | — | 65.2 |
LiveBench · Mathematics | 83.5 | — | 76.0 |
LiveBench · Overall | 68.8 | — | 58.1 |
LiveBench · Reasoning | 69.1 | — | 59.7 |
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 · simulated American Invitational Mathematics Examination problems testing advanced problem-solving skills. | 80.0 | — | 83.3 |
PostTrainBench | 13.9 | — | 7.5 |
SimpleBench SimpleBench · tests fundamental reasoning capabilities with straightforward problems designed to expose gaps in basic logical and spatial thinking. | 43.8 | — | 37.2 |
Terminal Bench Terminal-Bench 2.0 · evaluates AI agents on real terminal-based coding tasks · writing scripts, debugging, running tests, and managing projects entirely through command-line interaction. Tests both code quality and terminal fluency. Claude Opus 4.7 scores 69.4%, demonstrating significant agentic terminal competence. | 52.4 | — | 33.4 |
Pricing · per 1M tokens · projected $/mo at 10M tokens
| Model | Input | Output | Context | Projected $/mo |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| $0.60 | $1.92 | 203K tokens (~101 books) | $9.30 | |
| $0.10 | $0.30 | 262K tokens (~131 books) | $1.50 | |
| $0.38 | $1.74 | 203K tokens (~101 books) | $7.20 |