Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Codestral 2508 vs GLM 4.7 Flash

Updated October 21, 2026. 6 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.

Codestral 2508Mistral AI
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.90
0
GLM 4.7 FlashZ.ai
Coding
No data
Overall
14.9
Output $/M
$0.40
6
vs boards won of 6 shared

Decision reading

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Codestral 2508 has the edge where the context window is larger, 256K against 200K tokens, and where what matters is Design Arena: websites or Design Arena: UI components, where it leads.

Shared results
6
Codestral 2508 only
1
GLM 4.7 Flash only
37
Like-for-like categories
1 of 9

Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results only one model has describe coverage, not superiority.

Which one for your work

Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.

At a glance

Coding index
Codestral 2508 not benchmarked, GLM 4.7 Flash not benchmarked.
Widest category
Web design, 19.1 points apart on average over 6 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
Design Arena: UI components: Codestral 2508 1017 against GLM 4.7 Flash 1208, 23.9 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Codestral 2508 $0.90 against GLM 4.7 Flash $0.40 per million output tokens, 2.3x apart.
Context window
Codestral 2508 takes 256K tokens, GLM 4.7 Flash 200K.

Benchmark by benchmark

First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryCodestral 2508BarsGLM 4.7 FlashTies
Web design06
All shared boards06
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index4 boards, none shared
Coding benchmarks for Codestral 2508 and GLM 4.7 Flash
BenchmarkCodestral 2508GLM 4.7 FlashLeader
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured22.0%Only GLM 4.7 Flash measured
ALE-Bench137.8Not measuredOnly Codestral 2508 measured
LMArena Text: codingNot measured1382Only GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: software and ITNot measured1389Only GLM 4.7 Flash measured
Neither model has a result on the other 34 boards here
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
Intelligence benchmarks for Codestral 2508 and GLM 4.7 Flash
BenchmarkCodestral 2508GLM 4.7 FlashLeader
AA Intelligence IndexNot measured14.9Only GLM 4.7 Flash measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for Codestral 2508 and GLM 4.7 Flash
BenchmarkCodestral 2508GLM 4.7 FlashLeader
τ²-Bench TelecomNot measured98.8%Only GLM 4.7 Flash measured
Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
Reasoning benchmarks for Codestral 2508 and GLM 4.7 Flash
BenchmarkCodestral 2508GLM 4.7 FlashLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured58.1%Only GLM 4.7 Flash measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured7.6%Only GLM 4.7 Flash measured
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)Not measured60.5%Only GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: hard promptsNot measured1356Only GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: expertNot measured1357Only GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in EnglishNot measured1369Only GLM 4.7 Flash measured
Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index3 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for Codestral 2508 and GLM 4.7 Flash
BenchmarkCodestral 2508GLM 4.7 FlashLeader
OTIS Mock AIMENot measured58.3%Only GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: mathNot measured1355Only GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: mathematical workNot measured1369Only GLM 4.7 Flash measured
Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for Codestral 2508 and GLM 4.7 Flash
BenchmarkCodestral 2508GLM 4.7 FlashLeader
LMArena Text: scienceNot measured1358Only GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcareNot measured1343Only GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: legal and governmentNot measured1357Only GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: business and financeNot measured1343Only GLM 4.7 Flash measured
Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index06
Web design benchmarks for Codestral 2508 and GLM 4.7 Flash
BenchmarkCodestral 2508GLM 4.7 FlashLeader
Design Arena: websites10131194GLM 4.7 Flash
Design Arena: UI components10171208GLM 4.7 Flash
Design Arena: game dev9681135GLM 4.7 Flash
Design Arena: data viz10171123GLM 4.7 Flash
Design Arena: 3D10201121GLM 4.7 Flash
Design Arena: all code categories10071178GLM 4.7 Flash
Design Arena: SVGNot measured1038Only GLM 4.7 Flash measured
Neither model has a result on the other 2 boards here
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index18 boards, none shared
General benchmarks for Codestral 2508 and GLM 4.7 Flash
BenchmarkCodestral 2508GLM 4.7 FlashLeader
IFBenchNot measured60.8%Only GLM 4.7 Flash measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)Not measured41.7%Only GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena TextNot measured1351Only GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: instruction followingNot measured1327Only GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: creative writingNot measured1296Only GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: EnglishNot measured1373Only GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: non-EnglishNot measured1330Only GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: ChineseNot measured1403Only GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: GermanNot measured1336Only GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: KoreanNot measured1283Only GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: FrenchNot measured1332Only GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: SpanishNot measured1350Only GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: RussianNot measured1333Only GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: PolishNot measured1291Only GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: multi-turnNot measured1342Only GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: longer queriesNot measured1345Only GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: writing and languageNot measured1320Only GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and mediaNot measured1304Only GLM 4.7 Flash measured
Neither model has a result on the other 28 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Codestral 2508 and GLM 4.7 Flash
BenchmarkCodestral 2508GLM 4.7 FlashLeader
Neither model has a result on 5 boards here

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.

Chat turn

1K input + 500 output tokens

Codestral 2508$0.0008Fits in one request
GLM 4.7 Flash$0.0003Fits in one request

GLM 4.7 Flash costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Codestral 2508$0.018Fits in one request
GLM 4.7 Flash$0.0045Fits in one request

GLM 4.7 Flash costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Codestral 2508$0.069Fits in one request
GLM 4.7 Flash$0.017Exceeds the context window

GLM 4.7 Flash costs less

Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.

Specification differences

The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.

Specifications of Codestral 2508 and GLM 4.7 Flash
SpecificationMistral Codestral 2508Z.ai GLM 4.7 Flash
MakerMistral AIZ.ai
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedAugust 1, 2025January 19, 2026
Context window256K200K
Input $/Mtok$0.30$0.0653
Output $/Mtok$0.90$0.40
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Codestral 2508 better than GLM 4.7 Flash for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Codestral 2508 has the edge where the context window is larger, 256K against 200K tokens, and where what matters is Design Arena: websites or Design Arena: UI components, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, Codestral 2508 or GLM 4.7 Flash?

Codestral 2508 costs $0.30 per million input tokens and $0.90 per million output tokens; GLM 4.7 Flash costs $0.0653 and $0.40. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Codestral 2508 or GLM 4.7 Flash?

Codestral 2508, with 256K tokens against 200K.

How many benchmarks is the Codestral 2508 vs GLM 4.7 Flash comparison based on?

6 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Codestral 2508's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and GLM 4.7 Flash's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next