Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GLM 4.7 Flash vs Llama 4 Maverick

GLM 4.7 Flash leads Llama 4 Maverick on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 14.9 to 9.3, and GLM 4.7 Flash costs 2.5x less per output token ($0.40 vs $1.00 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 40 benchmarks have a result for both.

Replace GLM 4.7 Flash Replace Llama 4 Maverick
GLM 4.7 FlashZ.ai
Coding
No data
Overall
42.1
Output $/M
$0.40
38
Llama 4 MaverickMeta Llama
Coding
No data
Overall
21.8
Output $/M
$1.00
2
vs boards won of 40 shared

GLM 4.7 Flash or Llama 4 Maverick: which to pick

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

Pick GLM 4.7 Flash for output tokens 2.5x cheaper ($0.40 vs $1.00 per million) and work measured by GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) or Long context reasoning (AA-LCR), where it leads.

Model AGLM 4.7 FlashZ.aiNot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved taskModel BLlama 4 MaverickMeta LlamaNot benchmarkedNo coding benchmark$1.491 per solved task
Shared results
40
GLM 4.7 Flash only
3
Llama 4 Maverick only
45
Like-for-like categories
8 of 9

Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.

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
GLM 4.7 Flash not benchmarked, Llama 4 Maverick not benchmarked.
Widest category
Agentic work, 81.0 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
τ²-Bench Telecom: GLM 4.7 Flash 98.8% against Llama 4 Maverick 17.8%, 81.0 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GLM 4.7 Flash $0.40 against Llama 4 Maverick $1.00 per million output tokens, 2.5x apart.
Context window
GLM 4.7 Flash takes 200K tokens, Llama 4 Maverick 524K.

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
CategoryGLM 4.7 FlashBarsLlama 4 MaverickTies
Coding30
Intelligence10
Agentic work10
Reasoning41
Math20
Knowledge40
Web design60
General171
All shared boards382
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index30
Coding benchmarks for GLM 4.7 Flash and Llama 4 Maverick
BenchmarkGLM 4.7 FlashLlama 4 MaverickLeader
Aider polyglotNot measured15.6%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
SWE-bench VerifiedNot measured21.0%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
AA Coding IndexNot measured16.3Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)Not measured47.3%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured39.7%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
SciCodeNot measured31.7%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)22.0%6.8%GLM 4.7 Flash
WeirdMLNot measured24.5%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
ALE-BenchNot measured173.0Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
LMArena Text: coding13821301GLM 4.7 Flash
LMArena Text: software and IT13891299GLM 4.7 Flash
Neither model has a result on the other 28 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for GLM 4.7 Flash and Llama 4 Maverick
BenchmarkGLM 4.7 FlashLlama 4 MaverickLeader
AA Intelligence Index14.99.3GLM 4.7 Flash
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured132.2Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Agentic work benchmarks for GLM 4.7 Flash and Llama 4 Maverick
BenchmarkGLM 4.7 FlashLlama 4 MaverickLeader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured0.6Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
τ²-Bench Telecom98.8%17.8%GLM 4.7 Flash
Neither model has a result on the other 39 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index41
Reasoning benchmarks for GLM 4.7 Flash and Llama 4 Maverick
BenchmarkGLM 4.7 FlashLlama 4 MaverickLeader
GPQA DiamondNot measured69.4%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)Not measured71.7%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)58.1%67.1%Llama 4 Maverick
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)7.6%4.9%GLM 4.7 Flash
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)60.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
ARC-AGINot measured4.4%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
ARC-AGI-2Not measured0.0%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
SimpleBenchNot measured27.7%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts13561281GLM 4.7 Flash
LMArena Text: expert13571259GLM 4.7 Flash
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English13691295GLM 4.7 Flash
LMArena Vision: diagramsNot measured1134Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
LMArena Vision: homeworkNot measured1164Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
Kagi LLM BenchmarkNot measured55.9%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Math benchmarks for GLM 4.7 Flash and Llama 4 Maverick
BenchmarkGLM 4.7 FlashLlama 4 MaverickLeader
AIMENot measured25.2%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
MATH 500 (Vals AI)Not measured85.2%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
MGSM (Vals AI)Not measured92.4%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
AA Math IndexNot measured19.3Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured19.3%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
OTIS Mock AIME58.3%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: math13551299GLM 4.7 Flash
LMArena Text: mathematical work13691295GLM 4.7 Flash
Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index40
Knowledge benchmarks for GLM 4.7 Flash and Llama 4 Maverick
BenchmarkGLM 4.7 FlashLlama 4 MaverickLeader
MMLU ProNot measured79.4%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)Not measured77.8%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)Not measured49.7%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)Not measured66.6%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
MortgageTax (Vals AI)Not measured58.5%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
MedQA (Vals AI)Not measured43.3%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
MedCode (Vals AI)Not measured36.5%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured80.9%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
GeoBenchNot measured52.0%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
LMArena Text: science13581288GLM 4.7 Flash
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare13431275GLM 4.7 Flash
LMArena Text: legal and government13571286GLM 4.7 Flash
LMArena Text: business and finance13431260GLM 4.7 Flash
Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index60
Web design benchmarks for GLM 4.7 Flash and Llama 4 Maverick
BenchmarkGLM 4.7 FlashLlama 4 MaverickLeader
Design Arena: websites1194871GLM 4.7 Flash
Design Arena: UI components1208899GLM 4.7 Flash
Design Arena: game dev1135838GLM 4.7 Flash
Design Arena: data viz1123882GLM 4.7 Flash
Design Arena: 3D1121901GLM 4.7 Flash
Design Arena: all code categories1178880GLM 4.7 Flash
Design Arena: SVG1038Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
Neither model has a result on the other 2 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index171
General benchmarks for GLM 4.7 Flash and Llama 4 Maverick
BenchmarkGLM 4.7 FlashLlama 4 MaverickLeader
SAGE (Vals AI)Not measured35.7%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)Not measured54.2%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
IFBench60.8%43.0%GLM 4.7 Flash
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)41.7%50.0%Llama 4 Maverick
DTBenchNot measured61.9%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
LMCANot measured15.9%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
Fiction.LiveBenchNot measured46.2%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
Creative writing (Lech Mazur)Not measured62.0%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
LMArena Text13511287GLM 4.7 Flash
LMArena Text: instruction following13271267GLM 4.7 Flash
LMArena Text: creative writing12961266GLM 4.7 Flash
LMArena VisionNot measured1142Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
LMArena Text: English13731303GLM 4.7 Flash
LMArena Text: non-English13301269GLM 4.7 Flash
LMArena Text: Chinese14031277GLM 4.7 Flash
LMArena Text: German13361291GLM 4.7 Flash
LMArena Text: JapaneseNot measured1206Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
LMArena Text: Korean12831203GLM 4.7 Flash
LMArena Text: French13321259GLM 4.7 Flash
LMArena Text: Spanish13501293GLM 4.7 Flash
LMArena Text: Russian13331286GLM 4.7 Flash
LMArena Text: Polish12911275GLM 4.7 Flash
LMArena Text: multi-turn13421289GLM 4.7 Flash
LMArena Text: longer queries13451280GLM 4.7 Flash
LMArena Text: writing and language13201277GLM 4.7 Flash
LMArena Text: entertainment and media13041250GLM 4.7 Flash
LMArena Vision: EnglishNot measured1150Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
LMArena Vision: ChineseNot measured1141Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
LMArena Vision: reading textNot measured1143Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
LMArena Vision: humorNot measured1100Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
LMArena Vision: creative writingNot measured1099Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GLM 4.7 Flash and Llama 4 Maverick
BenchmarkGLM 4.7 FlashLlama 4 MaverickLeader
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

GLM 4.7 Flash$0.0003Fits in one request
Llama 4 Maverick$0.0008Fits in one request

GLM 4.7 Flash costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GLM 4.7 Flash$0.0045Fits in one request
Llama 4 Maverick$0.021Fits in one request

GLM 4.7 Flash costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GLM 4.7 Flash$0.017Exceeds the context window
Llama 4 Maverick$0.080Fits in one request

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 GLM 4.7 Flash and Llama 4 Maverick
SpecificationZ.ai GLM 4.7 FlashMeta Llama 4 Maverick
MakerZ.aiMeta Llama
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedJanuary 19, 2026April 5, 2025
Context window200K524K
Input $/Mtok$0.0653$0.35
Output $/Mtok$0.40$1.00
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computable$1.491
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GLM 4.7 Flash better than Llama 4 Maverick for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick GLM 4.7 Flash for output tokens 2.5x cheaper ($0.40 vs $1.00 per million) and work measured by GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) or Long context reasoning (AA-LCR), where it leads.

Which is cheaper, GLM 4.7 Flash or Llama 4 Maverick?

GLM 4.7 Flash costs $0.0653 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; Llama 4 Maverick costs $0.35 and $1.00. Cost per solved task is known for Llama 4 Maverick only.

Which has the bigger context window, GLM 4.7 Flash or Llama 4 Maverick?

Llama 4 Maverick, with 524K tokens against 200K.

How many benchmarks is the GLM 4.7 Flash vs Llama 4 Maverick comparison based on?

40 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. GLM 4.7 Flash's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Llama 4 Maverick's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next