LLMBenchmark.ai

Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GLM 4.7 vs GPT-5.6 Terra

Updated October 21, 2026. 68 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.

Replace GLM 4.7 Replace GPT-5.6 Terra
GLM 4.7Z.ai
Coding
33.6
Overall
22.2
Output $/M
$1.98
6
GPT-5.6 TerraOpenAI
Coding
69.0
Overall
42.1
Output $/M
$12.00
62
vs boards won of 68 shared

Decision reading

Pick GPT-5.6 Terra for coding: it scores 69.0 on the Vibe Coding Index against 33.6 for GLM 4.7.

Pick GLM 4.7 when output tokens cost 6.1x less, or when a solved task costs $0.29 against $0.42.

Model AGLM 4.7Z.ai33.6/1001 independent benchmark$0.29 per solved taskModel BGPT-5.6 TerraOpenAI69.0/1002 independent benchmarks$0.42 per solved task
Shared results
68
GLM 4.7 only
12
GPT-5.6 Terra only
56
Like-for-like categories
8 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-5.6 Terra 69.0 from 2 benchmarks.
Widest category
Math, 25.6 points apart on average over 4 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
ProofBench: GLM 4.7 6.0% against GPT-5.6 Terra 74.0%, 68.0 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GLM 4.7 $1.98 against GPT-5.6 Terra $12.00 per million output tokens, 6.1x apart.
Context window
GLM 4.7 takes 205K tokens, GPT-5.6 Terra 1.05M.

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-5.6 TerraTies
Coding010
Intelligence02
Agentic work23
Reasoning09
Math04
Knowledge28
Web design17
General119
All shared boards662
CodingLike-for-likeFour of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index010
Coding benchmarks for GLM 4.7 and GPT-5.6 Terra
BenchmarkGLM 4.7GPT-5.6 TerraLeader
LiveBench codingNot measured86.2%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
LMArena WebDev14351522GPT-5.6 Terra
AA Coding Index45.376.7GPT-5.6 Terra
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)82.2%85.9%GPT-5.6 Terra
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)69.4%95.4%GPT-5.6 Terra
Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI)Not measured22.7%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)Not measured74.6%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
Code migration (Vals AI)Not measured47.8%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
ProgramBench (Vals AI)Not measured0.5%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
IOI (Vals AI)Not measured87.6%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)Not measured77.5%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
Vibe Code Bench 1-100 (Vals AI)Not measured14.8%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
SkillsBench (Vals AI)Not measured58.9%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
CyberBench (Vals AI)Not measured72.1%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)89.4%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
SciCodeNot measured55.0%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)31.8%62.9%GPT-5.6 Terra
Terminal-Bench33.4%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
FrontierCodeNot measured41.3%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
WeirdMLNot measured78.3%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
ALE-Bench399.51951.4GPT-5.6 Terra
LMArena Text: coding14541485GPT-5.6 Terra
LMArena Text: software and IT14531482GPT-5.6 Terra
LMArena WebDev: React14201513GPT-5.6 Terra
LMArena WebDev: HTML14471526GPT-5.6 Terra
LMArena WebDev: from an imageNot measured1541Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Intelligence benchmarks for GLM 4.7 and GPT-5.6 Terra
BenchmarkGLM 4.7GPT-5.6 TerraLeader
AA Intelligence Index22.242.1GPT-5.6 Terra
Epoch Capabilities Index143.6160.1GPT-5.6 Terra
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index23
Agentic work benchmarks for GLM 4.7 and GPT-5.6 Terra
BenchmarkGLM 4.7GPT-5.6 TerraLeader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured43.2Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
Design Arena: agents building web appsNot measured1120Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
Design Arena: agents building full-stack apps10501061GPT-5.6 Terra
Design Arena: agents building mobile apps11051112GPT-5.6 Terra
Design Arena: agents building Android apps11181066GLM 4.7
Design Arena: agents building Godot games1058Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
Design Arena: agents building gamesNot measured1082Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
Design Arena: HTML slidesNot measured1108Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
Design Arena: PowerPoint slidesNot measured1130Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
LiveBench researchNot measured60.4%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
LiveBench browserNot measured84.0%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
LiveBench long agenticNot measured48.4%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
SREBench (Vals AI)Not measured9.5%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)Not measured54.4%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)Not measured30.0%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)Not measured41.4%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)Not measured66.2%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
Terminal-Bench-Science (Vals AI)Not measured10.0%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
τ²-Bench Telecom95.9%86.3%GLM 4.7
APEX-AgentsNot measured58.2%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
BALROGNot measured53.2%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
Vending-Bench 2$2,377$7,343GPT-5.6 Terra
Neither model has a result on the other 17 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index09
Reasoning benchmarks for GLM 4.7 and GPT-5.6 Terra
BenchmarkGLM 4.7GPT-5.6 TerraLeader
GPQA Diamond80.0%90.9%GPT-5.6 Terra
LiveBench reasoningNot measured90.6%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)Not measured86.5%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)85.9%92.5%GPT-5.6 Terra
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)27.4%42.9%GPT-5.6 Terra
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)83.3%93.3%GPT-5.6 Terra
ARC-AGINot measured96.5%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
ARC-AGI-2Not measured83.9%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
SimpleBench47.7%48.9%GPT-5.6 Terra
Chess puzzles21.0%47.0%GPT-5.6 Terra
Mystery game puzzlesNot measured35.0%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts14431469GPT-5.6 Terra
LMArena Text: expert14241496GPT-5.6 Terra
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English14521465GPT-5.6 Terra
LMArena Vision: diagramsNot measured1295Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
LMArena Vision: homeworkNot measured1312Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
Math benchmarks for GLM 4.7 and GPT-5.6 Terra
BenchmarkGLM 4.7GPT-5.6 TerraLeader
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%99.7%GPT-5.6 Terra
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3Not measured86.0%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
FrontierMath, tier 4Not measured70.7%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
ProofBench6.0%74.0%GPT-5.6 Terra
LMArena Text: math14241465GPT-5.6 Terra
LMArena Text: mathematical work14111478GPT-5.6 Terra
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index28
Knowledge benchmarks for GLM 4.7 and GPT-5.6 Terra
BenchmarkGLM 4.7GPT-5.6 TerraLeader
MMLU Pro82.7%86.7%GPT-5.6 Terra
LegalBench (Vals AI)83.4%85.1%GPT-5.6 Terra
CaseLaw (Vals AI)54.9%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)46.4%65.3%GPT-5.6 Terra
TaxEval (Vals AI)68.8%76.2%GPT-5.6 Terra
MortgageTax (Vals AI)Not measured67.3%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
MedQA (Vals AI)93.7%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
MedCode (Vals AI)32.8%43.4%GPT-5.6 Terra
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)85.6%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
SimpleQA Verified32.2%43.2%GPT-5.6 Terra
LMArena Text: science14571452GLM 4.7
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14691430GLM 4.7
LMArena Text: legal and government14441461GPT-5.6 Terra
LMArena Text: business and finance14291448GPT-5.6 Terra
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index17
Web design benchmarks for GLM 4.7 and GPT-5.6 Terra
BenchmarkGLM 4.7GPT-5.6 TerraLeader
Design Arena: websites12261269GPT-5.6 Terra
Design Arena: UI components11991259GPT-5.6 Terra
Design Arena: game dev11891230GPT-5.6 Terra
Design Arena: data viz11951240GPT-5.6 Terra
Design Arena: 3D11911135GLM 4.7
Design Arena: all code categories12171241GPT-5.6 Terra
Design Arena: SVG11421220GPT-5.6 Terra
Design Arena: ASCII art11651177GPT-5.6 Terra
LiveBench designNot measured76.0%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index119
General benchmarks for GLM 4.7 and GPT-5.6 Terra
BenchmarkGLM 4.7GPT-5.6 TerraLeader
LiveBench data analysisNot measured79.3%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI)Not measured62.4%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
SAGE (Vals AI)Not measured47.0%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)68.6%82.9%GPT-5.6 Terra
Vals Multimodal IndexNot measured65.1%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
IFBench67.9%71.2%GPT-5.6 Terra
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)71.0%83.0%GPT-5.6 Terra
DTBenchNot measured93.3%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
LMCANot measured54.9%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
CL-bench15.9%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
Surface Evolver BenchNot measured83.8%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
Furniture assemblyNot measured54.2%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
CL-bench Life10.9%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
LMArena Text14351448GPT-5.6 Terra
LMArena Text: instruction following14121456GPT-5.6 Terra
LMArena Text: creative writing14011413GPT-5.6 Terra
LMArena VisionNot measured1271Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
LMArena Text: English14531449GLM 4.7
LMArena Text: non-English14171441GPT-5.6 Terra
LMArena Text: Chinese14951514GPT-5.6 Terra
LMArena Text: German14261460GPT-5.6 Terra
LMArena Text: Japanese14391454GPT-5.6 Terra
LMArena Text: Korean13991427GPT-5.6 Terra
LMArena Text: French14321466GPT-5.6 Terra
LMArena Text: Spanish14341451GPT-5.6 Terra
LMArena Text: Russian14231452GPT-5.6 Terra
LMArena Text: Polish14351446GPT-5.6 Terra
LMArena Text: multi-turn14461453GPT-5.6 Terra
LMArena Text: longer queries14321454GPT-5.6 Terra
LMArena Text: writing and language14111431GPT-5.6 Terra
LMArena Text: entertainment and media14001418GPT-5.6 Terra
LMArena Vision: EnglishNot measured1272Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
LMArena Vision: ChineseNot measured1337Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
LMArena Vision: reading textNot measured1278Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
LMArena Vision: humorNot measured1236Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
LMArena Vision: creative writingNot measured1248Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
LMArena DocumentNot measured1472Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
Neither model has a result on the other 9 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-5.6 Terra
BenchmarkGLM 4.7GPT-5.6 TerraLeader
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-5.6 Terra$0.0080Fits in one request

GLM 4.7 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GLM 4.7$0.033Fits in one request
GPT-5.6 Terra$0.136Fits in one request

GLM 4.7 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GLM 4.7$0.128Exceeds the context window
GPT-5.6 Terra$0.520Fits in one request

GLM 4.7 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-5.6 Terra
SpecificationZ.ai GLM 4.7OpenAI GPT-5.6 Terra
MakerZ.aiOpenAI
WeightsOpen weightsNo public weights listed
ReleasedDecember 22, 2025July 9, 2026
Context window205K1.05M
Input $/Mtok$0.54$2.00
Output $/Mtok$1.98$12.00
Coding index33.669.0
Independent measurements behind it12
Cost per solved task$0.29$0.42
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GLM 4.7 better than GPT-5.6 Terra for coding?

Pick GPT-5.6 Terra for coding: it scores 69.0 on the Vibe Coding Index against 33.6 for GLM 4.7. Pick GLM 4.7 when output tokens cost 6.1x less, or when a solved task costs $0.29 against $0.42.

Which is cheaper, GLM 4.7 or GPT-5.6 Terra?

GLM 4.7 costs $0.54 per million input tokens and $1.98 per million output tokens; GPT-5.6 Terra costs $2.00 and $12.00. Per solved SWE-bench Verified task, GLM 4.7 costs $0.29 and GPT-5.6 Terra $0.42.

Which has the bigger context window, GLM 4.7 or GPT-5.6 Terra?

GPT-5.6 Terra, with 1.05M tokens against 205K.

How many benchmarks is the GLM 4.7 vs GPT-5.6 Terra comparison based on?

68 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-5.6 Terra's on 2. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next