LLMBenchmark.ai

Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GLM 4.7 vs GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)

Updated October 21, 2026. 33 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.

GLM 4.7Z.ai
Coding
33.6
Overall
22.2
Output $/M
$1.98
33
GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)OpenAI
Coding
3.6
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.60
0
vs boards won of 33 shared

Decision reading

Pick GLM 4.7 for coding: it scores 33.6 on the Vibe Coding Index against 3.6 for GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18).

Pick GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) when output tokens cost 3.3x less.

Shared results
33
GLM 4.7 only
47
GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) only
13
Like-for-like categories
5 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 33.6 from 1 benchmark, GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) 3.6 from 1 benchmark.
Widest category
Math, 41.9 points apart on average over 3 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
OTIS Mock AIME: GLM 4.7 83.3% against GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) 6.9%, 76.4 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GLM 4.7 $1.98 against GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) $0.60 per million output tokens, 3.3x apart.
Context window
GLM 4.7 takes 205K tokens, GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) 128K.

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 4.7BarsGPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)Ties
Coding20
Reasoning60
Math30
Knowledge50
General170
All shared boards330
CodingLike-for-likeFour of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index20
Coding benchmarks for GLM 4.7 and GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)
BenchmarkGLM 4.7GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)Leader
Aider polyglotNot measured3.6%Only GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena WebDev1435Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
AA Coding Index45.3Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)82.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)69.4%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)89.4%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)31.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
Terminal-Bench33.4%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
WeirdMLNot measured11.8%Only GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
ALE-Bench399.5Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
LMArena Text: coding14541290GLM 4.7
LMArena Text: software and IT14531291GLM 4.7
LMArena WebDev: React1420Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML1447Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 24 boards here
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
Intelligence benchmarks for GLM 4.7 and GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)
BenchmarkGLM 4.7GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)Leader
AA Intelligence Index22.2Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
Epoch Capabilities Index143.6Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for GLM 4.7 and GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)
BenchmarkGLM 4.7GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)Leader
Design Arena: agents building full-stack apps1050Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile apps1105Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
Design Arena: agents building Android apps1118Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
Design Arena: agents building Godot games1058Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
τ²-Bench Telecom95.9%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
BALROGNot measured17.4%Only GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
Vending-Bench 2$2,377Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 32 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index60
Reasoning benchmarks for GLM 4.7 and GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)
BenchmarkGLM 4.7GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)Leader
GPQA Diamond80.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)85.9%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)27.4%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)83.3%37.7%GLM 4.7
SimpleBench47.7%10.7%GLM 4.7
Chess puzzles21.0%3.0%GLM 4.7
Mystery game puzzlesNot measured12.0%Only GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
VPCTNot measured34.0%Only GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts14431267GLM 4.7
LMArena Text: expert14241234GLM 4.7
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English14521278GLM 4.7
Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index30
Math benchmarks for GLM 4.7 and GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)
BenchmarkGLM 4.7GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)Leader
AIME93.3%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
MGSM (Vals AI)88.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
AA Math Index95.0Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)95.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
OTIS Mock AIME83.3%6.9%GLM 4.7
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3Not measured0.7%Only GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
ProofBench6.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
MATH level 5Not measured52.6%Only GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text: math14241267GLM 4.7
LMArena Text: mathematical work14111271GLM 4.7
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index50
Knowledge benchmarks for GLM 4.7 and GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)
BenchmarkGLM 4.7GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)Leader
MMLU Pro82.7%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)83.4%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
CaseLaw (Vals AI)54.9%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)46.4%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)68.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
MedQA (Vals AI)93.7%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
MedCode (Vals AI)32.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)85.6%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
SimpleQA Verified32.2%8.3%GLM 4.7
MMLUNot measured76.7%Only GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
GeoBenchNot measured64.0%Only GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text: science14571286GLM 4.7
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14691282GLM 4.7
LMArena Text: legal and government14441305GLM 4.7
LMArena Text: business and finance14291265GLM 4.7
Neither model has a result on the other 2 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for GLM 4.7 and GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)
BenchmarkGLM 4.7GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)Leader
Design Arena: websites1226Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
Design Arena: UI components1199Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
Design Arena: game dev1189Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
Design Arena: data viz1195Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
Design Arena: 3D1191Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
Design Arena: all code categories1217Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
Design Arena: SVG1142Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
Design Arena: ASCII art1165Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index170
General benchmarks for GLM 4.7 and GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)
BenchmarkGLM 4.7GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)Leader
MedScribe (Vals AI)68.6%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
IFBench67.9%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)71.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
Creative writing (Lech Mazur)Not measured67.2%Only GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
CL-bench15.9%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
CL-bench Life10.9%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
LMArena Text14351286GLM 4.7
LMArena Text: instruction following14121258GLM 4.7
LMArena Text: creative writing14011268GLM 4.7
LMArena VisionNot measured1066Only GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text: English14531301GLM 4.7
LMArena Text: non-English14171266GLM 4.7
LMArena Text: Chinese14951265GLM 4.7
LMArena Text: German14261272GLM 4.7
LMArena Text: Japanese14391216GLM 4.7
LMArena Text: Korean13991195GLM 4.7
LMArena Text: French14321297GLM 4.7
LMArena Text: Spanish14341276GLM 4.7
LMArena Text: Russian14231275GLM 4.7
LMArena Text: Polish14351244GLM 4.7
LMArena Text: multi-turn14461285GLM 4.7
LMArena Text: longer queries14321289GLM 4.7
LMArena Text: writing and language14111282GLM 4.7
LMArena Text: entertainment and media14001253GLM 4.7
LMArena Vision: EnglishNot measured1072Only GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Vision: ChineseNot measured1033Only GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
Neither model has a result on the other 20 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GLM 4.7 and GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)
BenchmarkGLM 4.7GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)Leader
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$0.0015Fits in one request
GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)$0.0004Fits in one request

GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GLM 4.7$0.033Fits in one request
GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)$0.0093Fits in one request

GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GLM 4.7$0.128Exceeds the context window
GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)$0.036Exceeds the context window

GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) 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 and GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)
SpecificationZ.ai GLM 4.7OpenAI GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)
MakerZ.aiOpenAI
WeightsOpen weightsNo public weights listed
ReleasedDecember 22, 2025July 18, 2024
Context window205K128K
Input $/Mtok$0.54$0.15
Output $/Mtok$1.98$0.60
Coding index33.63.6
Independent measurements behind it11
Cost per solved task$0.29Not computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GLM 4.7 better than GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) for coding?

Pick GLM 4.7 for coding: it scores 33.6 on the Vibe Coding Index against 3.6 for GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18). Pick GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) when output tokens cost 3.3x less.

Which is cheaper, GLM 4.7 or GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)?

GLM 4.7 costs $0.54 per million input tokens and $1.98 per million output tokens; GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) costs $0.15 and $0.60. Cost per solved task is known for GLM 4.7 only.

Which has the bigger context window, GLM 4.7 or GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)?

GLM 4.7, with 205K tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks is the GLM 4.7 vs GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) comparison based on?

33 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. GLM 4.7's coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark and GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)'s on 1. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next