GLM-4.7-Flash vs GPT-5
Wins 0 of 6 areas
—
Wins 6 of 6 areas
Coding · Agents · Reasoning · Facts · Long documents · Following instructions
GPT-5 is the stronger all-rounder.GLM-4.7-Flash is cheaper.
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 software04GPT-54 of 4 tests
- ReasoningHard problems that need careful thinking03GPT-53 of 3 tests
- AgentsCarrying out multi-step tasks on its own02GPT-52 of 2 tests
- FactsGetting facts right instead of making them up12GPT-52 of 3 tests
- Long documentsFinding answers in very long texts01GPT-51 of 1 test
- Following instructionsDoing exactly what it is asked01GPT-51 of 1 test
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 96% 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 GPT-5 pulls ahead
- Reasons across sets of long documentsAA-LCR+36.5points ahead
- Graduate-level biology, physics and chemistry questionsGPQA Diamond+27.3points ahead
- Answers hard knowledge questions correctlyAA-Omniscience · Accuracy+24.1points ahead
Where GLM-4.7-Flash pulls ahead
No clear win on a test scored out of 100.
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.
CodingGPT-5
- LiveCodeBench v6GPT-5 by 236487+23
- SWE-bench VerifiedGPT-5 by 15.759.274.9+15.7
- Terminal-Bench HardGPT-5 by 10.62232.6+10.6
- SciCodeGPT-5 by 9.233.742.9+9.2
ReasoningGPT-5
- GPQA DiamondGPT-5 by 27.358.185.4+27.3
- Humanity's Last ExamGPT-5 by 20.97.628.5+20.9
- CritPtGPT-5 by 5.40.35.7+5.4
FactsGPT-5
- AA-Omniscience · AccuracyGPT-5 by 24.116.140.3+24.1
- AA-Omniscience · Non-hallucinationGPT-5 by 11.76.117.8+11.7
- Vectara HHEM hallucination ratelower is betterGLM-4.7-Flash by 5.89.315.1+5.8
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-OmniscienceGPT-5 by 53.9-62.6-8.7+53.9
- AA Agentic IndexGLM-4.7-Flash by 19.54626.5+19.5
- τ²-Bench Telecom (AA run)GLM-4.7-Flash by 1498.884.8+14
- Artificial Analysis Coding IndexGPT-5 by 11.925.937.8+11.9
- GPQA (unspecified)GPT-5 by 10.575.285.7+10.5
- vectara_avg_summary_lengthGPT-5 by 90.9 rating points71.8162.7+90.9 rating
- vectara_answer_rateGPT-5 by 8.391.699.9+8.3
- AA IntelligenceGPT-5 by 8.114.923+8.1
- vectara_factual_consistencyGLM-4.7-Flash by 5.890.784.9+5.8
- AIME 2025GPT-5 by 391.694.6+3
- τ²-BenchGPT-5 by 2.979.582.4+2.9
Questions people ask
Which is better, GLM-4.7-Flash or GPT-5?
GPT-5 wins all six areas where both have results: coding, agents, reasoning, facts, long documents and following instructions. GLM-4.7-Flash wins none, but costs 96% less.
Which is better for coding?
GPT-5. It wins 4 of the 4 coding tests both models report; GLM-4.7-Flash wins none.
Which is cheaper?
GLM-4.7-Flash costs $0.07 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; GPT-5 costs $1.25 and $10.00. That makes GLM-4.7-Flash about 96% 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.