Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GLM-4.7-Flash
Wins 4 of 6 areas
Coding · Reasoning · Facts · Long documents
Wins 1 of 6 areas
Following instructions
Claude Sonnet 4.5 is the stronger all-rounder.GLM-4.7-Flash is cheaper and better at following instructions.
Scores updated · 25 tests both models report · How we compare
Where each one wins
Tests won in each of the six areas where both have results. Each piece is one test, so a longer bar means more evidence; grey means the two scored within a point of each other.
- CodingWriting and fixing software30Claude Sonnet 4.53 of 4 tests · 1 tie
- ReasoningHard problems that need careful thinking20Claude Sonnet 4.52 of 3 tests · 1 tie
- FactsGetting facts right instead of making them up21Claude Sonnet 4.52 of 3 tests
- Long documentsFinding answers in very long texts10Claude Sonnet 4.51 of 1 test
- Following instructionsDoing exactly what it is asked01GLM-4.7-Flash1 of 1 test
- AgentsCarrying out multi-step tasks on its own11Even1 each
Long documents and following instructions rest on a single test each.
What it costs
Prices per million tokens, roughly 750,000 words. The bars show the cost of a million tokens read plus a million written.
GLM-4.7-Flash costs 97% less for the same work.
The biggest differences
The tests each model wins by the widest margin, up to three each. Scores are out of 100.
Where Claude Sonnet 4.5 pulls ahead
- Avoids making up answers it doesn't knowAA-Omniscience · Non-hallucination+44.8points ahead
- Reasons across sets of long documentsAA-LCR+30.6points ahead
- Graduate-level biology, physics and chemistry questionsGPQA Diamond+25.3points ahead
Where GLM-4.7-Flash pulls ahead
- Finds hard-to-locate facts by browsing the webBrowseComp+18.7points ahead
- Follows unfamiliar, precisely checkable instructionsIFBench+3.5points ahead
Every test, side by side
All 25 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
CodingClaude Sonnet 4.5
- SWE-bench VerifiedClaude Sonnet 4.5 by 1877.259.2+18
- Terminal-Bench HardClaude Sonnet 4.5 by 13.635.622+13.6
- SciCodeClaude Sonnet 4.5 by 1245.733.7+12
- LiveCodeBench v6tie6464tie
AgentsEven
- BrowseCompGLM-4.7-Flash by 18.724.142.8+18.7
- GDPValClaude Sonnet 4.5 by 3.620.516.9+3.6
ReasoningClaude Sonnet 4.5
- GPQA DiamondClaude Sonnet 4.5 by 25.383.458.1+25.3
- Humanity's Last ExamClaude Sonnet 4.5 by 10.217.87.6+10.2
- CritPttie1.10.3tie
FactsClaude Sonnet 4.5
- AA-Omniscience · Non-hallucinationClaude Sonnet 4.5 by 44.850.96.1+44.8
- AA-Omniscience · AccuracyClaude Sonnet 4.5 by 16.732.916.1+16.7
- Vectara HHEM hallucination ratelower is betterGLM-4.7-Flash by 2.7129.3+2.7
Long documentsClaude Sonnet 4.5
- AA-LCRClaude Sonnet 4.5 by 30.672.341.7+30.6
Following instructionsGLM-4.7-Flash
- IFBenchGLM-4.7-Flash by 3.557.360.8+3.5
Other results11 tests, not counted
Tests outside the eight areas. They are not counted above: several are summary scores built from other tests, or the same test under another name.
- AA-OmniscienceClaude Sonnet 4.5 by 62.5-0.1-62.6+62.5
- AA Agentic IndexGLM-4.7-Flash by 28.517.546+28.5
- Artificial Analysis Coding IndexClaude Sonnet 4.5 by 26.252.125.9+26.2
- τ²-Bench Telecom (AA run)GLM-4.7-Flash by 20.778.198.8+20.7
- τ²-BenchClaude Sonnet 4.5 by 18.59879.5+18.5
- GPQA (unspecified)Claude Sonnet 4.5 by 8.283.475.2+8.2
- AA IntelligenceClaude Sonnet 4.5 by 5.820.714.9+5.8
- vectara_avg_summary_lengthClaude Sonnet 4.5 by 56 rating points127.871.8+56 rating
- AIME 2025GLM-4.7-Flash by 4.68791.6+4.6
- vectara_answer_rateClaude Sonnet 4.5 by 495.691.6+4
- vectara_factual_consistencyGLM-4.7-Flash by 2.78890.7+2.7
Questions people ask
Which is better, Claude Sonnet 4.5 or GLM-4.7-Flash?
Claude Sonnet 4.5 wins four of the six areas where both have results: coding, reasoning, facts and long documents. GLM-4.7-Flash wins following instructions, and costs 97% less. They are level on agents.
Which is better for coding?
Claude Sonnet 4.5. It wins 3 of the 4 coding tests both models report; GLM-4.7-Flash wins none, and 1 is a tie.
Which is cheaper?
Claude Sonnet 4.5 costs $3.00 per million input tokens and $15.00 per million output tokens; GLM-4.7-Flash costs $0.07 and $0.40. That makes GLM-4.7-Flash about 97% cheaper for the same work.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 25 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 14 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 11 are listed but not counted, because several are summary scores or repeat a test. Each score is the one shown on the model's own page.