Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GLM 4.7 vs Hy3 preview

Hy3 preview leads GLM 4.7 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 25.3 to 22.2, and Hy3 preview costs 3.7x less per output token ($0.60 vs $2.20 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 35 benchmarks have a result for both.

GLM 4.7Z.ai
Coding
55.1
Overall
56.9
Output $/M
$2.20
28
Hy3 previewTencent
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.60
7
vs boards won of 35 shared

GLM 4.7 or Hy3 preview: which to pick

Only GLM 4.7 has a coding score, 55.1 on the Vibe Coding Index; Hy3 preview has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Hy3 preview for output tokens 3.7x cheaper ($0.60 vs $2.20 per million) and a larger context window (262K against 205K tokens).

Shared results
35
GLM 4.7 only
46
Hy3 preview only
1
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, Hy3 preview not benchmarked.
Widest category
Coding, 9.2 points apart on average over 7 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
LMArena WebDev: HTML: GLM 4.7 1447 against Hy3 preview 1356, 15.1 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GLM 4.7 $2.20 against Hy3 preview $0.60 per million output tokens, 3.7x apart.
Context window
GLM 4.7 takes 205K tokens, Hy3 preview 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 4.7BarsHy3 previewTies
Coding52
Intelligence01
Agentic work10
Reasoning32
Math02
Knowledge40
General150
All shared boards287
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index52
Coding benchmarks for GLM 4.7 and Hy3 preview
BenchmarkGLM 4.7Hy3 previewLeader
LMArena WebDev14351357GLM 4.7
AA Coding Index45.358.8Hy3 preview
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%34.1%Hy3 preview
Terminal-Bench33.4%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
ALE-Bench399.5Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
LMArena Text: coding14541421GLM 4.7
LMArena Text: software and IT14531423GLM 4.7
LMArena WebDev: React14201349GLM 4.7
LMArena WebDev: HTML14471356GLM 4.7
Neither model has a result on the other 27 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for GLM 4.7 and Hy3 preview
BenchmarkGLM 4.7Hy3 previewLeader
AA Intelligence Index22.225.3Hy3 preview
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 Hy3 preview
BenchmarkGLM 4.7Hy3 previewLeader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured24.1Only Hy3 preview measured
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%92.7%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 33 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index32
Reasoning benchmarks for GLM 4.7 and Hy3 preview
BenchmarkGLM 4.7Hy3 previewLeader
GPQA Diamond80.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)85.9%86.7%Hy3 preview
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)27.4%27.8%Hy3 preview
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 prompts14431413GLM 4.7
LMArena Text: expert14241422GLM 4.7
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English14521416GLM 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
Math benchmarks for GLM 4.7 and Hy3 preview
BenchmarkGLM 4.7Hy3 previewLeader
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: math14241424Hy3 preview
LMArena Text: mathematical work14111442Hy3 preview
Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index40
Knowledge benchmarks for GLM 4.7 and Hy3 preview
BenchmarkGLM 4.7Hy3 previewLeader
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: science14571416GLM 4.7
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14691405GLM 4.7
LMArena Text: legal and government14441430GLM 4.7
LMArena Text: business and finance14291397GLM 4.7
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 Hy3 preview
BenchmarkGLM 4.7Hy3 previewLeader
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 index150
General benchmarks for GLM 4.7 and Hy3 preview
BenchmarkGLM 4.7Hy3 previewLeader
MedScribe (Vals AI)68.6%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
IFBench67.9%63.1%GLM 4.7
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)71.0%64.7%GLM 4.7
CL-bench15.9%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
CL-bench Life10.9%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
LMArena Text14351401GLM 4.7
LMArena Text: instruction following14121383GLM 4.7
LMArena Text: creative writing14011339GLM 4.7
LMArena Text: English14531409GLM 4.7
LMArena Text: non-English14171390GLM 4.7
LMArena Text: Chinese14951435GLM 4.7
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: French14321425GLM 4.7
LMArena Text: Spanish14341399GLM 4.7
LMArena Text: Russian14231399GLM 4.7
LMArena Text: Polish1435Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn14461411GLM 4.7
LMArena Text: longer queries14321402GLM 4.7
LMArena Text: writing and language14111370GLM 4.7
LMArena Text: entertainment and media14001352GLM 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
Image generation benchmarks for GLM 4.7 and Hy3 preview
BenchmarkGLM 4.7Hy3 previewLeader
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
Hy3 preview$0.0005Fits in one request

Hy3 preview costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GLM 4.7$0.037Fits in one request
Hy3 preview$0.011Fits in one request

Hy3 preview costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GLM 4.7$0.142Exceeds the context window
Hy3 preview$0.042Fits in one request

Hy3 preview 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 Hy3 preview
SpecificationZ.ai GLM 4.7Tencent Hy3 preview
MakerZ.aiTencent
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedDecember 22, 2025April 22, 2026
Context window205K262K
Input $/Mtok$0.60$0.18
Output $/Mtok$2.20$0.60
Coding index55.1Not benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it21
Cost per solved task$0.29Not computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GLM 4.7 better than Hy3 preview for coding?

Only GLM 4.7 has a coding score, 55.1 on the Vibe Coding Index; Hy3 preview has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Hy3 preview for output tokens 3.7x cheaper ($0.60 vs $2.20 per million) and a larger context window (262K against 205K tokens).

Which is cheaper, GLM 4.7 or Hy3 preview?

GLM 4.7 costs $0.60 per million input tokens and $2.20 per million output tokens; Hy3 preview costs $0.18 and $0.60. Cost per solved task is known for GLM 4.7 only.

Which has the bigger context window, GLM 4.7 or Hy3 preview?

Hy3 preview, with 262K tokens against 205K.

How many benchmarks is the GLM 4.7 vs Hy3 preview comparison based on?

35 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. GLM 4.7's coding index rests on 2 independent benchmarks and Hy3 preview's on 1. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next