Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GLM 4.7 vs Mistral Small 3.2 24B

Mistral Small 3.2 24B costs 7.3x less per output token than GLM 4.7 ($0.30 vs $2.20 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 5 benchmarks have a result for both.

GLM 4.7Z.ai
Coding
55.1
Overall
56.9
Output $/M
$2.20
5
Mistral Small 3.2 24BMistral AI
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.30
0
vs boards won of 5 shared

GLM 4.7 or Mistral Small 3.2 24B: which to pick

Only GLM 4.7 has a coding score, 55.1 on the Vibe Coding Index; Mistral Small 3.2 24B has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Mistral Small 3.2 24B for output tokens 7.3x cheaper ($0.30 vs $2.20 per million) and a larger context window (256K against 205K tokens).

Shared results
5
GLM 4.7 only
76
Mistral Small 3.2 24B only
0
Like-for-like categories
1 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 55.1 from 2 benchmarks, Mistral Small 3.2 24B not benchmarked.
Widest category
Web design, 37.5 points apart on average over 5 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
Design Arena: websites: GLM 4.7 1226 against Mistral Small 3.2 24B 896, 41.3 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GLM 4.7 $2.20 against Mistral Small 3.2 24B $0.30 per million output tokens, 7.3x apart.
Context window
GLM 4.7 takes 205K tokens, Mistral Small 3.2 24B 256K.

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 4.7BarsMistral Small 3.2 24BTies
Web design50
All shared boards50
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index12 boards, none shared
Coding benchmarks for GLM 4.7 and Mistral Small 3.2 24B
BenchmarkGLM 4.7Mistral Small 3.2 24BLeader
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
ALE-Bench399.5Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
LMArena Text: coding1454Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1453Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
LMArena WebDev: React1420Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML1447Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 27 boards here
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
Intelligence benchmarks for GLM 4.7 and Mistral Small 3.2 24B
BenchmarkGLM 4.7Mistral Small 3.2 24BLeader
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 Mistral Small 3.2 24B
BenchmarkGLM 4.7Mistral Small 3.2 24BLeader
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 apps1112Not 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
Vending-Bench 2$2,377Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
BrowseComp-Plus64.7%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 34 boards here
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index9 boards, none shared
Reasoning benchmarks for GLM 4.7 and Mistral Small 3.2 24B
BenchmarkGLM 4.7Mistral Small 3.2 24BLeader
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%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
SimpleBench47.7%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
Chess puzzles21.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts1443Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
LMArena Text: expert1424Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English1452Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for GLM 4.7 and Mistral Small 3.2 24B
BenchmarkGLM 4.7Mistral Small 3.2 24BLeader
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%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
ProofBench6.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
LMArena Text: math1424Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work1411Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index13 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for GLM 4.7 and Mistral Small 3.2 24B
BenchmarkGLM 4.7Mistral Small 3.2 24BLeader
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%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
LMArena Text: science1457Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare1469Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
LMArena Text: legal and government1444Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
LMArena Text: business and finance1429Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index50
Web design benchmarks for GLM 4.7 and Mistral Small 3.2 24B
BenchmarkGLM 4.7Mistral Small 3.2 24BLeader
Design Arena: websites1226896GLM 4.7
Design Arena: UI components1199907GLM 4.7
Design Arena: game dev1189888GLM 4.7
Design Arena: data viz1195929GLM 4.7
Design Arena: 3D1191Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
Design Arena: all code categories1217907GLM 4.7
Design Arena: SVG1143Not 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
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index22 boards, none shared
General benchmarks for GLM 4.7 and Mistral Small 3.2 24B
BenchmarkGLM 4.7Mistral Small 3.2 24BLeader
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
CL-bench15.9%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
CL-bench Life10.9%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
LMArena Text1435Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
LMArena Text: instruction following1412Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
LMArena Text: creative writing1401Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
LMArena Text: English1453Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
LMArena Text: non-English1417Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
LMArena Text: Chinese1495Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
LMArena Text: German1426Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
LMArena Text: Japanese1439Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
LMArena Text: Korean1399Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
LMArena Text: French1432Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1434Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
LMArena Text: Russian1423Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
LMArena Text: Polish1435Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn1446Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
LMArena Text: longer queries1432Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
LMArena Text: writing and language1411Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media1400Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 24 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 Mistral Small 3.2 24B
BenchmarkGLM 4.7Mistral Small 3.2 24BLeader
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$0.0017Fits in one request
Mistral Small 3.2 24B$0.0003Fits in one request

Mistral Small 3.2 24B costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GLM 4.7$0.037Fits in one request
Mistral Small 3.2 24B$0.0059Fits in one request

Mistral Small 3.2 24B costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GLM 4.7$0.142Exceeds the context window
Mistral Small 3.2 24B$0.023Fits in one request

Mistral Small 3.2 24B 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 Mistral Small 3.2 24B
SpecificationZ.ai GLM 4.7Mistral Small 3.2 24B
MakerZ.aiMistral AI
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedDecember 22, 2025June 20, 2025
Context window205K256K
Input $/Mtok$0.60$0.10
Output $/Mtok$2.20$0.30
Coding index55.1Not benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it20
Cost per solved task$0.29Not computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GLM 4.7 better than Mistral Small 3.2 24B for coding?

Only GLM 4.7 has a coding score, 55.1 on the Vibe Coding Index; Mistral Small 3.2 24B has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Mistral Small 3.2 24B for output tokens 7.3x cheaper ($0.30 vs $2.20 per million) and a larger context window (256K against 205K tokens).

Which is cheaper, GLM 4.7 or Mistral Small 3.2 24B?

GLM 4.7 costs $0.60 per million input tokens and $2.20 per million output tokens; Mistral Small 3.2 24B costs $0.10 and $0.30. Cost per solved task is known for GLM 4.7 only.

Which has the bigger context window, GLM 4.7 or Mistral Small 3.2 24B?

Mistral Small 3.2 24B, with 256K tokens against 205K.

How many benchmarks is the GLM 4.7 vs Mistral Small 3.2 24B comparison based on?

5 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. GLM 4.7's coding index rests on 2 independent benchmarks and Mistral Small 3.2 24B's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next