Model Comparison

Claude Opus 4.6 vs GLM-4.7

Claude Opus 4.6 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. GLM-4.7 is 10.0x cheaper per token.

Want to compare interactively?Try the playground

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

7 benchmarks

Claude Opus 4.6 outperforms in 7 benchmarks (AIME 2025, BrowseComp, GPQA, Humanity's Last Exam, SWE-bench Multilingual, SWE-Bench Verified, Terminal-Bench 2.0), while GLM-4.7 is better at 0 benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.6 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Fri Apr 10 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

GLM-4.7 costs less

For input processing, Claude Opus 4.6 ($5.00/1M tokens) is 8.3x more expensive than GLM-4.7 ($0.60/1M tokens).

For output processing, Claude Opus 4.6 ($25.00/1M tokens) is 11.4x more expensive than GLM-4.7 ($2.20/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Claude Opus 4.6 is more expensive than GLM-4.7.*

* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens

Lowest available price from all providers
Fri Apr 10 2026 • llm-stats.com
Anthropic
Claude Opus 4.6
Input tokens$5.00
Output tokens$25.00
Best providerAnthropic
Zhipu AI
GLM-4.7
Input tokens$0.60
Output tokens$2.20
Best providerFireworks
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Claude Opus 4.6 accepts 1,000,000 input tokens compared to GLM-4.7's 202,800 tokens. GLM-4.7 can generate longer responses up to 131,072 tokens, while Claude Opus 4.6 is limited to 128,000 tokens.

Anthropic
Claude Opus 4.6
Input1,000,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Zhipu AI
GLM-4.7
Input202,800 tokens
Output131,072 tokens
Fri Apr 10 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

Both Claude Opus 4.6 and GLM-4.7 support multimodal inputs.

They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.

Claude Opus 4.6

Text
Images
Audio
Video

GLM-4.7

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude Opus 4.6 is licensed under a proprietary license, while GLM-4.7 uses MIT.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

Claude Opus 4.6

Proprietary

Closed source

GLM-4.7

MIT

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude Opus 4.6 was released on 2026-02-05, while GLM-4.7 was released on 2025-12-22.

Claude Opus 4.6 is 2 months newer than GLM-4.7.

Claude Opus 4.6

Feb 5, 2026

2 months ago

1mo newer
GLM-4.7

Dec 22, 2025

3 months ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.

Unable to compare the recency of their training data.

No cutoff dates available

Provider Availability

Claude Opus 4.6 is available from Anthropic. GLM-4.7 is available from Fireworks, Novita.

Claude Opus 4.6

anthropic logo
Anthropic
Input Price:Input: $5.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $25.00/1M

GLM-4.7

fireworks logo
Fireworks
Input Price:Input: $0.60/1MOutput Price:Output: $2.20/1M
novita logo
Novita
Input Price:Input: $0.60/1MOutput Price:Output: $2.20/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Key Takeaways

Anthropic
Larger context window (1,000,000 tokens)
Higher AIME 2025 score (99.8% vs 95.7%)
Higher BrowseComp score (84.0% vs 52.0%)
Higher GPQA score (91.3% vs 85.7%)
Higher Humanity's Last Exam score (53.1% vs 42.8%)
Higher SWE-bench Multilingual score (77.8% vs 66.7%)
Higher SWE-Bench Verified score (80.8% vs 73.8%)
Higher Terminal-Bench 2.0 score (65.4% vs 41.0%)
Zhipu AI
Less expensive input tokens
Less expensive output tokens
Has open weights

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
Anthropic
Claude Opus 4.6
Zhipu AI
GLM-4.7

FAQ

Common questions about Claude Opus 4.6 vs GLM-4.7

Claude Opus 4.6 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Claude Opus 4.6 is made by Anthropic and GLM-4.7 is made by Zhipu AI. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their benchmark scores, pricing, and capabilities above.
Claude Opus 4.6 scores Vending-Bench 2: 100.0%, AIME 2025: 99.8%, Tau2 Telecom: 99.3%, Graphwalks parents >128k: 95.4%, MRCR v2 (8-needle): 93.0%. GLM-4.7 scores AIME 2025: 95.7%, Tau-bench: 87.4%, GPQA: 85.7%, LiveCodeBench v6: 84.9%, MMLU-Pro: 84.3%.
GLM-4.7 is 8.3x cheaper for input tokens. Claude Opus 4.6 costs $5.00/M input and $25.00/M output via anthropic. GLM-4.7 costs $0.60/M input and $2.20/M output via fireworks.
Claude Opus 4.6 supports 1.0M tokens and GLM-4.7 supports 203K tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.
Key differences include context window (1.0M vs 203K), input pricing ($5.00 vs $0.60/M), licensing (Proprietary vs MIT). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.
Claude Opus 4.6 is developed by Anthropic and GLM-4.7 is developed by Zhipu AI.