Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GLM 4.7 vs Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct

GLM 4.7 leads Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 22.2 to 9.9, at about the same output price ($2.20 vs $1.90 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 39 benchmarks have a result for both.

GLM 4.7Z.ai
Coding
55.1
Overall
56.9
Output $/M
$2.20
34
Qwen3 VL 235B A22B InstructQwen
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$1.90
5
vs boards won of 39 shared

GLM 4.7 or Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct: which to pick

Only GLM 4.7 has a coding score, 55.1 on the Vibe Coding Index; Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct for output tokens 1.2x cheaper ($1.90 vs $2.20 per million) and a larger context window (262K against 205K tokens).

Shared results
39
GLM 4.7 only
42
Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct only
10
Like-for-like categories
7 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, Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct not benchmarked.
Widest category
Agentic work, 41.8 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
τ²-Bench Telecom: GLM 4.7 95.9% against Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct 54.1%, 41.8 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GLM 4.7 $2.20 against Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct $1.90 per million output tokens, 1.2x apart.
Context window
GLM 4.7 takes 205K tokens, Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct 262K.

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 4.7BarsQwen3 VL 235B A22B InstructTies
Coding40
Intelligence10
Agentic work10
Reasoning41
Math22
Knowledge41
General181
All shared boards345
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index40
Coding benchmarks for GLM 4.7 and Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct
BenchmarkGLM 4.7Qwen3 VL 235B A22B InstructLeader
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%64.6%GLM 4.7
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)31.8%11.4%GLM 4.7
Terminal-Bench33.4%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
ALE-Bench399.5Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
LMArena Text: coding14541438GLM 4.7
LMArena Text: software and IT14531442GLM 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 27 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for GLM 4.7 and Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct
BenchmarkGLM 4.7Qwen3 VL 235B A22B InstructLeader
AA Intelligence Index22.29.9GLM 4.7
Epoch Capabilities Index143.6Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Agentic work benchmarks for GLM 4.7 and Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct
BenchmarkGLM 4.7Qwen3 VL 235B A22B InstructLeader
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%54.1%GLM 4.7
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
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index41
Reasoning benchmarks for GLM 4.7 and Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct
BenchmarkGLM 4.7Qwen3 VL 235B A22B InstructLeader
GPQA Diamond80.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)85.9%77.2%GLM 4.7
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)27.4%11.9%GLM 4.7
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 prompts14431428GLM 4.7
LMArena Text: expert14241442Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English14521439GLM 4.7
LMArena Vision: diagramsNot measured1255Only Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct measured
LMArena Vision: homeworkNot measured1277Only Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index22
Math benchmarks for GLM 4.7 and Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct
BenchmarkGLM 4.7Qwen3 VL 235B A22B InstructLeader
AIME93.3%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
MGSM (Vals AI)88.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
AA Math Index95.088.3GLM 4.7
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)95.0%88.3%GLM 4.7
OTIS Mock AIME83.3%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
ProofBench6.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
LMArena Text: math14241425Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct
LMArena Text: mathematical work14111419Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct
Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index41
Knowledge benchmarks for GLM 4.7 and Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct
BenchmarkGLM 4.7Qwen3 VL 235B A22B InstructLeader
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%83.6%GLM 4.7
SimpleQA Verified32.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
LMArena Text: science14571444GLM 4.7
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14691431GLM 4.7
LMArena Text: legal and government14441438GLM 4.7
LMArena Text: business and finance14291433Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct
Neither model has a result on the other 5 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 Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct
BenchmarkGLM 4.7Qwen3 VL 235B A22B InstructLeader
Design Arena: websites1225Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
Design Arena: UI components1196Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
Design Arena: game dev1188Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
Design Arena: data viz1195Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
Design Arena: 3D1190Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
Design Arena: all code categories1216Not 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 index181
General benchmarks for GLM 4.7 and Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct
BenchmarkGLM 4.7Qwen3 VL 235B A22B InstructLeader
MedScribe (Vals AI)68.6%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
IFBench67.9%56.5%GLM 4.7
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)71.0%63.7%GLM 4.7
CL-bench15.9%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
CL-bench Life10.9%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
LMArena Text14351420GLM 4.7
LMArena Text: instruction following14121406GLM 4.7
LMArena Text: creative writing14011366GLM 4.7
LMArena VisionNot measured1247Only Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: English14531429GLM 4.7
LMArena Text: non-English14171405GLM 4.7
LMArena Text: Chinese14951463GLM 4.7
LMArena Text: German14261424GLM 4.7
LMArena Text: Japanese14391385GLM 4.7
LMArena Text: Korean13991394GLM 4.7
LMArena Text: French14321452Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct
LMArena Text: Spanish14341428GLM 4.7
LMArena Text: Russian14231408GLM 4.7
LMArena Text: Polish14351419GLM 4.7
LMArena Text: multi-turn14461428GLM 4.7
LMArena Text: longer queries14321419GLM 4.7
LMArena Text: writing and language14111392GLM 4.7
LMArena Text: entertainment and media14001368GLM 4.7
LMArena Vision: EnglishNot measured1256Only Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct measured
LMArena Vision: ChineseNot measured1283Only Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct measured
LMArena Vision: reading textNot measured1253Only Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct measured
LMArena Vision: humorNot measured1209Only Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct measured
LMArena Vision: captioningNot measured1281Only Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct measured
LMArena Vision: recognizing thingsNot measured1249Only Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct measured
LMArena Vision: creative writingNot measured1220Only Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 16 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 Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct
BenchmarkGLM 4.7Qwen3 VL 235B A22B InstructLeader
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
Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct$0.0012Fits in one request

Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GLM 4.7$0.037Fits in one request
Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct$0.016Fits in one request

Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GLM 4.7$0.142Exceeds the context window
Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct$0.061Fits in one request

Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct 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 Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct
SpecificationZ.ai GLM 4.7Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct
MakerZ.aiQwen
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedDecember 22, 2025September 23, 2025
Context window205K262K
Input $/Mtok$0.60$0.21
Output $/Mtok$2.20$1.90
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 Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct for coding?

Only GLM 4.7 has a coding score, 55.1 on the Vibe Coding Index; Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct for output tokens 1.2x cheaper ($1.90 vs $2.20 per million) and a larger context window (262K against 205K tokens).

Which is cheaper, GLM 4.7 or Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct?

GLM 4.7 costs $0.60 per million input tokens and $2.20 per million output tokens; Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct costs $0.21 and $1.90. Cost per solved task is known for GLM 4.7 only.

Which has the bigger context window, GLM 4.7 or Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct?

Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct, with 262K tokens against 205K.

How many benchmarks is the GLM 4.7 vs Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct comparison based on?

39 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. GLM 4.7's coding index rests on 2 independent benchmarks and Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next