GLM-4.7-Flash vs LongCat-Flash-Thinking
GLM-4.7-Flash and LongCat-Flash-Thinking are closely matched at 23.8 and 28.8 on the LLM Stats Score. GLM-4.7-Flash is 3.4x cheaper per token.
Zhipu AI · Meituan · Updated for 2026
Which is better?
GLM-4.7-Flash and LongCat-Flash-Thinking are closely matched on the overall LLM Stats Score at 23.8 and 28.8.
In the 3 individual benchmarks reported for both models, LongCat-Flash-Thinking wins 2; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.
On price, GLM-4.7-Flash is roughly 3.4x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.
Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.
Choose GLM-4.7-Flash
- cost matters — it's about 3.4x cheaper per token
- you want the most recent training data — it shipped Jan 2026
Choose LongCat-Flash-Thinking
- you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 2 of 3 exact shared results
At a glance
The differences that matter most.
Capability indexes
Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks
Individual benchmarks
6 reported for GLM-4.7-Flash · 14 for LongCat-Flash-Thinking
GLM-4.7-Flash outperforms in 1 benchmarks (AIME 2025), while LongCat-Flash-Thinking is better at 2 benchmarks (GPQA, SWE-Bench Verified).
LongCat-Flash-Thinking shows notably better performance in the majority of benchmarks.
Human preference
Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores
Pricing Analysis
Price comparison per million tokens
For input processing, GLM-4.7-Flash ($0.07/1M tokens) is 4.3x cheaper than LongCat-Flash-Thinking ($0.30/1M tokens).
For output processing, GLM-4.7-Flash ($0.40/1M tokens) is 3.0x cheaper than LongCat-Flash-Thinking ($1.20/1M tokens).
In conclusion, LongCat-Flash-Thinking is more expensive than GLM-4.7-Flash.*
* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens
Model Size
Parameter count comparison
LongCat-Flash-Thinking has 530.0B more parameters than GLM-4.7-Flash, making it 1766.7% larger.
Context Window
Maximum input and output token capacity
Both models have the same input context window of 128,000 tokens. LongCat-Flash-Thinking can generate longer responses up to 128,000 tokens, while GLM-4.7-Flash is limited to 16,384 tokens.
License
Usage and distribution terms
Both models are licensed under MIT.
Both models share the same licensing terms, providing consistent usage rights.
MIT
Open weights
MIT
Open weights
Release Timeline
When each model was launched
GLM-4.7-Flash was released on 2026-01-19, while LongCat-Flash-Thinking was released on 2025-09-22.
GLM-4.7-Flash is 4 months newer than LongCat-Flash-Thinking.
Jan 19, 2026
7 months ago
3mo newerSep 22, 2025
11 months ago
Knowledge Cutoff
When training data ends
Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.
Unable to compare the recency of their training data.
Provider Availability
GLM-4.7-Flash is available from ZAI. LongCat-Flash-Thinking is available from Meituan.
GLM-4.7-Flash
LongCat-Flash-Thinking
Outputs Comparison
Judge for yourself.
Run your own prompts against GLM-4.7-Flash and LongCat-Flash-Thinking side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.
FAQ
Common questions about GLM-4.7-Flash vs LongCat-Flash-Thinking.