Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GLM 4.7 Flash vs Extract

Updated October 21, 2026. 0 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.

GLM 4.7 FlashZ.ai
Coding
No data
Overall
14.9
Output $/M
$0.40
S ExtractScaledown
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
No data
vs 200K vs 1M context window. Extract fits 5.0x more.

Decision reading

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

Compare them on price, context and the boards below.

Shared results
0
GLM 4.7 Flash only
43
Extract only
0
Like-for-like categories
0 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
GLM 4.7 Flash not benchmarked, Extract not benchmarked.
Widest category
No category has a result for both models.
Widest single gap
No benchmark has a result for both models.
Output price
GLM 4.7 Flash $0.40 against Extract Free per million output tokens.
Context window
GLM 4.7 Flash takes 200K tokens, Extract 1M.

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.

CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index3 boards, none shared
Coding benchmarks for GLM 4.7 Flash and Extract
BenchmarkGLM 4.7 FlashExtractLeader
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)22.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: coding1382Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1389Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
Neither model has a result on the other 35 boards here
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
Intelligence benchmarks for GLM 4.7 Flash and Extract
BenchmarkGLM 4.7 FlashExtractLeader
AA Intelligence Index14.9Not measuredOnly 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 GLM 4.7 Flash and Extract
BenchmarkGLM 4.7 FlashExtractLeader
τ²-Bench Telecom98.8%Not measuredOnly 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 GLM 4.7 Flash and Extract
BenchmarkGLM 4.7 FlashExtractLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)58.1%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)7.6%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)60.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts1356Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: expert1357Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English1369Not measuredOnly 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 GLM 4.7 Flash and Extract
BenchmarkGLM 4.7 FlashExtractLeader
OTIS Mock AIME58.3%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: math1355Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work1369Not measuredOnly 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 GLM 4.7 Flash and Extract
BenchmarkGLM 4.7 FlashExtractLeader
LMArena Text: science1358Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare1343Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: legal and government1357Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: business and finance1343Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for GLM 4.7 Flash and Extract
BenchmarkGLM 4.7 FlashExtractLeader
Design Arena: websites1194Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
Design Arena: UI components1208Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
Design Arena: game dev1135Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
Design Arena: data viz1123Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
Design Arena: 3D1121Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
Design Arena: all code categories1178Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
Design Arena: SVG1038Not measuredOnly 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 GLM 4.7 Flash and Extract
BenchmarkGLM 4.7 FlashExtractLeader
IFBench60.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)41.7%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text1351Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: instruction following1327Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: creative writing1296Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: English1373Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: non-English1330Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: Chinese1403Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: German1336Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: Korean1283Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: French1332Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1350Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: Russian1333Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: Polish1291Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn1342Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: longer queries1345Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: writing and language1320Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media1304Not measuredOnly 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 GLM 4.7 Flash and Extract
BenchmarkGLM 4.7 FlashExtractLeader
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
Extract$0.0000Fits in one request

Extract costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GLM 4.7 Flash$0.0045Fits in one request
Extract$0.0020Fits in one request

Extract costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GLM 4.7 Flash$0.017Exceeds the context window
Extract$0.0080Fits in one request

Extract 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 Extract
SpecificationZ.ai GLM 4.7 FlashScaleDown Extract
MakerZ.aiScaledown
WeightsOpen weightsNo public weights listed
ReleasedJanuary 19, 2026October 13, 2026
Context window200K1M
Input $/Mtok$0.0653$0.04
Output $/Mtok$0.40Free
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GLM 4.7 Flash better than Extract for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Compare them on price, context and the boards below.

Which is cheaper, GLM 4.7 Flash or Extract?

GLM 4.7 Flash costs $0.0653 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; Extract costs $0.04 and Free. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

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

Extract, with 1M tokens against 200K.

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

0 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 Extract's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next