The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Claude Sonnet 4 vs GLM-4.7-Flash

Claude Sonnet 4 and GLM-4.7-Flash are closely matched at 24.3 and 23.8 on the LLM Stats Score. GLM-4.7-Flash is 39.3x cheaper per token.

Anthropic · Zhipu AI · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Claude Sonnet 4 and GLM-4.7-Flash are closely matched on the overall LLM Stats Score at 24.3 and 23.8.

In the 3 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Claude Sonnet 4 wins 2; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.

On price, GLM-4.7-Flash is roughly 39.3x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

Claude Sonnet 4 also accepts a larger context window (200,000 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.

Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose Claude Sonnet 4

  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 2 of 3 exact shared results
  • you process long inputs — it offers a 200,000 token context window

Choose GLM-4.7-Flash

  • cost matters — it's about 39.3x cheaper per token
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Jan 2026
  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Claude Sonnet 4
Anthropic
GLM-4.7-Flash
Zhipu AI
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
24.3
#157
23.8
#163
Reasoning
24.4
#149
23.8
#153
Coding
17.0
#116
4.6
#199
Agents
5.9
#135
4.9
#141
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
2 of 3
1 of 3
Input price
$3.00 / M
$0.07 / M
Output price
$15.00 / M
$0.40 / M
Context window
200,000
128,000

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

1 shared
Index
Claude Sonnet 4
GLM-4.7-Flash
Math
16.1#203
21.2#142
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

8 reported for Claude Sonnet 4 · 6 for GLM-4.7-Flash

3 shared

Claude Sonnet 4 outperforms in 2 benchmarks (GPQA, SWE-Bench Verified), while GLM-4.7-Flash is better at 1 benchmark (AIME 2025).

Claude Sonnet 4 shows notably better performance in the majority of benchmarks.

Fri Sep 04 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

GLM-4.7-Flash costs less

For input processing, Claude Sonnet 4 ($3.00/1M tokens) is 42.9x more expensive than GLM-4.7-Flash ($0.07/1M tokens).

For output processing, Claude Sonnet 4 ($15.00/1M tokens) is 37.5x more expensive than GLM-4.7-Flash ($0.40/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Claude Sonnet 4 is more expensive than GLM-4.7-Flash.*

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

Lowest available price from all providers
Fri Sep 04 2026 • llm-stats.com
Anthropic
Claude Sonnet 4
Input tokens$3.00
Output tokens$15.00
Best providerAnthropic
Zhipu AI
GLM-4.7-Flash
Input tokens$0.07
Output tokens$0.40
Best providerUnknown Organization
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Claude Sonnet 4 accepts 200,000 input tokens compared to GLM-4.7-Flash's 128,000 tokens. Claude Sonnet 4 can generate longer responses up to 64,000 tokens, while GLM-4.7-Flash is limited to 16,384 tokens.

Anthropic
Claude Sonnet 4
Input200,000 tokens
Output64,000 tokens
Zhipu AI
GLM-4.7-Flash
Input128,000 tokens
Output16,384 tokens
Fri Sep 04 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Claude Sonnet 4 supports multimodal inputs, whereas GLM-4.7-Flash does not.

Claude Sonnet 4 can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Claude Sonnet 4

Text
Images
Audio
Video

GLM-4.7-Flash

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude Sonnet 4 is licensed under a proprietary license, while GLM-4.7-Flash uses MIT.

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

Claude Sonnet 4

Proprietary

Closed source

GLM-4.7-Flash

MIT

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude Sonnet 4 was released on 2025-05-22, while GLM-4.7-Flash was released on 2026-01-19.

GLM-4.7-Flash is 8 months newer than Claude Sonnet 4.

Claude Sonnet 4

May 22, 2025

1.3 years ago

GLM-4.7-Flash

Jan 19, 2026

7 months ago

8mo newer

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 Sonnet 4 is available from Anthropic, Bedrock, Google. GLM-4.7-Flash is available from ZAI.

Claude Sonnet 4

anthropic logo
Anthropic
Input Price:Input: $3.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $15.00/1M
bedrock logo
AWS Bedrock
Input Price:Input: $3.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $15.00/1M
google logo
Google
Input Price:Input: $3.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $15.00/1M

GLM-4.7-Flash

z logo
Unknown Organization
Input Price:Input: $0.07/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.40/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Claude Sonnet 4 and GLM-4.7-Flash side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Claude Sonnet 4
✓ Preferred
GLM-4.7-Flash
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Claude Sonnet 4 vs GLM-4.7-Flash.

Which is better, Claude Sonnet 4 or GLM-4.7-Flash?

Claude Sonnet 4 and GLM-4.7-Flash are closely matched on the LLM Stats Score at 24.3 and 23.8. Claude Sonnet 4 is made by Anthropic and GLM-4.7-Flash is made by Zhipu AI. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does Claude Sonnet 4 compare to GLM-4.7-Flash in benchmarks?

Claude Sonnet 4 scores MMMLU: 86.5%, TAU-bench Retail: 80.5%, GPQA: 75.4%, MMMU: 74.4%, SWE-Bench Verified: 72.7%. GLM-4.7-Flash scores AIME 2025: 91.6%, Tau-bench: 79.5%, GPQA: 75.2%, SWE-Bench Verified: 59.2%, BrowseComp: 42.8%.

Is Claude Sonnet 4 cheaper than GLM-4.7-Flash?

GLM-4.7-Flash is 42.9x cheaper for input tokens. Claude Sonnet 4 costs $3.00/M input and $15.00/M output via anthropic. GLM-4.7-Flash costs $0.07/M input and $0.40/M output via z.

What are the context window sizes for Claude Sonnet 4 and GLM-4.7-Flash?

Claude Sonnet 4 supports 200K tokens and GLM-4.7-Flash supports 128K tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Claude Sonnet 4 and GLM-4.7-Flash?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (24.3 vs 23.8), context window (200K vs 128K), input pricing ($3.00 vs $0.07/M), multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (Proprietary vs MIT). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Claude Sonnet 4 and GLM-4.7-Flash?

Claude Sonnet 4 is developed by Anthropic and GLM-4.7-Flash is developed by Zhipu AI.

Related comparisons