GLM 4.7 vs Beam 1.0 501B A23B
Beam 1.0 501B A23B costs 2.0x less per output token than GLM 4.7 ($1.10 vs $2.20 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 28 benchmarks have a result for both.
GLM 4.7 or Beam 1.0 501B A23B: which to pick
Only GLM 4.7 has a coding score, 55.1 on the Vibe Coding Index; Beam 1.0 501B A23B has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Pick Beam 1.0 501B A23B for output tokens 2.0x cheaper ($1.10 vs $2.20 per million) and a larger context window (1.05M against 205K tokens).
- Shared results
- 28
- GLM 4.7 only
- 53
- Beam 1.0 501B A23B only
- 0
- Like-for-like categories
- 6 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.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Only GLM 4.7 has a coding score, so no call is made.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
No call
Only GLM 4.7 has a AA Intelligence Index result, 22.2.
Directional only
Reasoning
GPQA Diamond
No call
Only GLM 4.7 has a GPQA Diamond result, 80.0%.
Directional only
Math
AIME
No call
Only GLM 4.7 has a AIME result, 93.3%.
Directional only
Knowledge
MMLU Pro
No call
Only GLM 4.7 has a MMLU Pro result, 82.7%.
Directional only
Web design
Design Arena: websites
Beam 1.0 501B A23B
Beam 1.0 501B A23B leads, 1253 against 1226.
Same board, both measured
Long documents
Listed context window
Beam 1.0 501B A23B
Beam 1.0 501B A23B takes 1.05M tokens against 205K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Beam 1.0 501B A23B
GLM 4.7 $0.0017, Beam 1.0 501B A23B $0.0009 per turn.
List prices
Cost per solved task
One SWE-bench Verified task, solved
No call
Only GLM 4.7 has the number, $0.29.
Directional only
At a glance
- Coding index
- GLM 4.7 55.1 from 2 benchmarks, Beam 1.0 501B A23B not benchmarked.
- Widest category
- Math, 8.2 points apart on average over 2 shared benchmarks.
- Widest single gap
- LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare: GLM 4.7 1469 against Beam 1.0 501B A23B 1376, 15.4 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- GLM 4.7 $2.20 against Beam 1.0 501B A23B $1.10 per million output tokens, 2.0x apart.
- Context window
- GLM 4.7 takes 205K tokens, Beam 1.0 501B A23B 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.
| Category | GLM 4.7 | Bars | Beam 1.0 501B A23B | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 1 | 4 | ||
| Reasoning | 2 | 1 | ||
| Math | 0 | 2 | ||
| Knowledge | 3 | 1 | ||
| Web design | 0 | 2 | ||
| General | 10 | 2 | ||
| All shared boards | 16 | 12 |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index14
| Benchmark | GLM 4.7 | Beam 1.0 501B A23B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1435 | 1437 | Beam 1.0 501B A23B |
| AA Coding Index | 45.3 | Not measured | Only GLM 4.7 measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) | 82.2% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.7 measured |
| SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI) | 69.4% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.7 measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) | 89.4% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.7 measured |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | 31.8% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.7 measured |
| Terminal-Bench | 33.4% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.7 measured |
| ALE-Bench | 399.5 | Not measured | Only GLM 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: coding | 1454 | 1473 | Beam 1.0 501B A23B |
| LMArena Text: software and IT | 1453 | 1461 | Beam 1.0 501B A23B |
| LMArena WebDev: React | 1420 | 1443 | Beam 1.0 501B A23B |
| LMArena WebDev: HTML | 1447 | 1436 | GLM 4.7 |
| 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
| Benchmark | GLM 4.7 | Beam 1.0 501B A23B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 22.2 | Not measured | Only GLM 4.7 measured |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 143.6 | Not measured | Only GLM 4.7 measured |
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GLM 4.7 | Beam 1.0 501B A23B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: agents building full-stack apps | 1050 | Not measured | Only GLM 4.7 measured |
| Design Arena: agents building mobile apps | 1105 | Not measured | Only GLM 4.7 measured |
| Design Arena: agents building Android apps | 1112 | Not measured | Only GLM 4.7 measured |
| Design Arena: agents building Godot games | 1058 | Not measured | Only GLM 4.7 measured |
| τ²-Bench Telecom | 95.9% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.7 measured |
| Vending-Bench 2 | $2,377 | Not measured | Only GLM 4.7 measured |
| BrowseComp-Plus | 64.7% | Not measured | Only 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 index21
| Benchmark | GLM 4.7 | Beam 1.0 501B A23B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 80.0% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.7 measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 85.9% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.7 measured |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 27.4% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.7 measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | 83.3% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.7 measured |
| SimpleBench | 47.7% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.7 measured |
| Chess puzzles | 21.0% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts | 1443 | 1442 | GLM 4.7 |
| LMArena Text: expert | 1424 | 1447 | Beam 1.0 501B A23B |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts in English | 1452 | 1451 | GLM 4.7 |
| Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here | |||
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
| Benchmark | GLM 4.7 | Beam 1.0 501B A23B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AIME | 93.3% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.7 measured |
| MGSM (Vals AI) | 88.2% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.7 measured |
| AA Math Index | 95.0 | Not measured | Only GLM 4.7 measured |
| AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run) | 95.0% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.7 measured |
| OTIS Mock AIME | 83.3% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.7 measured |
| ProofBench | 6.0% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: math | 1424 | 1459 | Beam 1.0 501B A23B |
| LMArena Text: mathematical work | 1411 | 1475 | Beam 1.0 501B A23B |
| Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here | |||
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index31
| Benchmark | GLM 4.7 | Beam 1.0 501B A23B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro | 82.7% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.7 measured |
| LegalBench (Vals AI) | 83.4% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.7 measured |
| CaseLaw (Vals AI) | 54.9% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.7 measured |
| CorpFin (Vals AI) | 46.4% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.7 measured |
| TaxEval (Vals AI) | 68.8% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.7 measured |
| MedQA (Vals AI) | 93.7% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.7 measured |
| MedCode (Vals AI) | 32.8% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.7 measured |
| MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run) | 85.6% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.7 measured |
| SimpleQA Verified | 32.2% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: science | 1457 | 1430 | GLM 4.7 |
| LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare | 1469 | 1376 | GLM 4.7 |
| LMArena Text: legal and government | 1444 | 1433 | GLM 4.7 |
| LMArena Text: business and finance | 1429 | 1430 | Beam 1.0 501B A23B |
| Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here | |||
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
| Benchmark | GLM 4.7 | Beam 1.0 501B A23B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: websites | 1226 | 1253 | Beam 1.0 501B A23B |
| Design Arena: UI components | 1199 | Not measured | Only GLM 4.7 measured |
| Design Arena: game dev | 1189 | 1233 | Beam 1.0 501B A23B |
| Design Arena: data viz | 1195 | Not measured | Only GLM 4.7 measured |
| Design Arena: 3D | 1191 | Not measured | Only GLM 4.7 measured |
| Design Arena: all code categories | 1217 | Not measured | Only GLM 4.7 measured |
| Design Arena: SVG | 1143 | Not measured | Only GLM 4.7 measured |
| Design Arena: ASCII art | 1165 | Not measured | Only 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 index102
| Benchmark | GLM 4.7 | Beam 1.0 501B A23B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MedScribe (Vals AI) | 68.6% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.7 measured |
| IFBench | 67.9% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.7 measured |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 71.0% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.7 measured |
| CL-bench | 15.9% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.7 measured |
| CL-bench Life | 10.9% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text | 1435 | 1425 | GLM 4.7 |
| LMArena Text: instruction following | 1412 | 1430 | Beam 1.0 501B A23B |
| LMArena Text: creative writing | 1401 | 1390 | GLM 4.7 |
| LMArena Text: English | 1453 | 1436 | GLM 4.7 |
| LMArena Text: non-English | 1417 | 1413 | GLM 4.7 |
| LMArena Text: Chinese | 1495 | 1424 | GLM 4.7 |
| LMArena Text: German | 1426 | Not measured | Only GLM 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: Japanese | 1439 | Not measured | Only GLM 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: Korean | 1399 | Not measured | Only GLM 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: French | 1432 | 1461 | Beam 1.0 501B A23B |
| LMArena Text: Spanish | 1434 | Not measured | Only GLM 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: Russian | 1423 | 1412 | GLM 4.7 |
| LMArena Text: Polish | 1435 | Not measured | Only GLM 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: multi-turn | 1446 | 1414 | GLM 4.7 |
| LMArena Text: longer queries | 1432 | 1429 | GLM 4.7 |
| LMArena Text: writing and language | 1411 | 1400 | GLM 4.7 |
| LMArena Text: entertainment and media | 1400 | 1399 | GLM 4.7 |
| 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
| Benchmark | GLM 4.7 | Beam 1.0 501B A23B | 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
Beam 1.0 501B A23B costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Beam 1.0 501B A23B costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Beam 1.0 501B A23B 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.
| Specification | Z.ai GLM 4.7 | Reflection Beam 1.0 501B A23B |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Z.ai | Reflection |
| Weights | Open weights | Open weights |
| Released | December 22, 2025 | October 16, 2026 |
| Context window | 205K | 1.05M |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.60 | $0.35 |
| Output $/Mtok | $2.20 | $1.10 |
| Coding index | 55.1 | Not benchmarked |
| Independent measurements behind it | 2 | 1 |
| Cost per solved task | $0.29 | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is GLM 4.7 better than Beam 1.0 501B A23B for coding?
Only GLM 4.7 has a coding score, 55.1 on the Vibe Coding Index; Beam 1.0 501B A23B has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Beam 1.0 501B A23B for output tokens 2.0x cheaper ($1.10 vs $2.20 per million) and a larger context window (1.05M against 205K tokens).
Which is cheaper, GLM 4.7 or Beam 1.0 501B A23B?
GLM 4.7 costs $0.60 per million input tokens and $2.20 per million output tokens; Beam 1.0 501B A23B costs $0.35 and $1.10. Cost per solved task is known for GLM 4.7 only.
Which has the bigger context window, GLM 4.7 or Beam 1.0 501B A23B?
Beam 1.0 501B A23B, with 1.05M tokens against 205K.
How many benchmarks is the GLM 4.7 vs Beam 1.0 501B A23B comparison based on?
28 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. GLM 4.7's coding index rests on 2 independent benchmarks and Beam 1.0 501B A23B's on 1. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.