Model Comparison

GLM-5 vs GLM-4.7-FlashWhich is better in 2026?

GLM-5 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. GLM-4.7-Flash is 10.2x cheaper per token.

Verdict: GLM-5 vs GLM-4.7-Flash — which is better?

GLM-5 (by Zhipu AI) and GLM-4.7-Flash (by Zhipu AI) are two of the AI models people compare most. Here is how they stack up on benchmarks, price and capabilities, and which one to pick in 2026.

GLM-5 outperforms in 2 benchmarks (BrowseComp, SWE-Bench Verified), while GLM-4.7-Flash is better at 0 benchmarks. GLM-5 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

On price, GLM-4.7-Flash is roughly 10.2x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

GLM-5 also accepts a larger context window (200,000 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.

Choose GLM-5 if…

  • you want the strongest raw capability — it leads on 2 of 2 shared benchmarks
  • you process long inputs — it offers a 200,000 token context window
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Feb 2026

Choose GLM-4.7-Flash if…

  • cost matters — it's about 10.2x cheaper per token

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

2 benchmarks

GLM-5 outperforms in 2 benchmarks (BrowseComp, SWE-Bench Verified), while GLM-4.7-Flash is better at 0 benchmarks.

GLM-5 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Sat Jun 27 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

GLM-4.7-Flash costs less

For input processing, GLM-5 ($1.00/1M tokens) is 14.3x more expensive than GLM-4.7-Flash ($0.07/1M tokens).

For output processing, GLM-5 ($3.20/1M tokens) is 8.0x more expensive than GLM-4.7-Flash ($0.40/1M tokens).

In conclusion, GLM-5 is more expensive than GLM-4.7-Flash.*

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

Lowest available price from all providers
Sat Jun 27 2026 • llm-stats.com
Zhipu AI
GLM-5
Input tokens$1.00
Output tokens$3.20
Best providerFriendliAI
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→

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

714.0B diff

GLM-5 has 714.0B more parameters than GLM-4.7-Flash, making it 2380.0% larger.

Zhipu AI
GLM-5
744.0Bparameters
Zhipu AI
GLM-4.7-Flash
30.0Bparameters
744.0B
GLM-5
30.0B
GLM-4.7-Flash

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

GLM-5 accepts 200,000 input tokens compared to GLM-4.7-Flash's 128,000 tokens. GLM-5 can generate longer responses up to 128,000 tokens, while GLM-4.7-Flash is limited to 16,384 tokens.

Zhipu AI
GLM-5
Input200,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Zhipu AI
GLM-4.7-Flash
Input128,000 tokens
Output16,384 tokens
Sat Jun 27 2026 • llm-stats.com

License

Usage and distribution terms

Both models are licensed under MIT.

Both models share the same licensing terms, providing consistent usage rights.

GLM-5

MIT

Open weights

GLM-4.7-Flash

MIT

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

GLM-5 was released on 2026-02-11, while GLM-4.7-Flash was released on 2026-01-19.

GLM-5 is 1 month newer than GLM-4.7-Flash.

GLM-5

Feb 11, 2026

4 months ago

3w newer
GLM-4.7-Flash

Jan 19, 2026

5 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

GLM-5 is available from FriendliAI, ZAI. GLM-4.7-Flash is available from ZAI.

GLM-5

friendli logo
FriendliAI
Input Price:Input: $1.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $3.20/1M
z logo
Unknown Organization
Input Price:Input: $1.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $3.20/1M

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→

Key Takeaways

Zhipu AI
Larger context window (200,000 tokens)
Higher BrowseComp score (75.9% vs 42.8%)
Higher SWE-Bench Verified score (77.8% vs 59.2%)
Zhipu AI
Less expensive input tokens
Less expensive output tokens

Detailed Comparison

Interactive Arena

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against GLM-5 and GLM-4.7-Flash side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

GLM-5
✓ Preferred
GLM-4.7-Flash
Open in Playground
AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
Zhipu AI
GLM-5
Zhipu AI
GLM-4.7-Flash

FAQ

Common questions about GLM-5 vs GLM-4.7-Flash.

Which is better, GLM-5 or GLM-4.7-Flash?

GLM-5 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. GLM-5 is made by Zhipu AI and GLM-4.7-Flash is made by Zhipu AI. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their benchmark scores, pricing, and capabilities above.

How does GLM-5 compare to GLM-4.7-Flash in benchmarks?

GLM-5 scores t2-bench: 89.7%, SWE-Bench Verified: 77.8%, BrowseComp: 75.9%, MCP Atlas: 67.8%, Terminal-Bench 2.0: 56.2%. 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 GLM-5 cheaper than GLM-4.7-Flash?

GLM-4.7-Flash is 14.3x cheaper for input tokens. GLM-5 costs $1.00/M input and $3.20/M output via friendli. GLM-4.7-Flash costs $0.07/M input and $0.40/M output via z.

What are the context window sizes for GLM-5 and GLM-4.7-Flash?

GLM-5 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 GLM-5 and GLM-4.7-Flash?

Key differences include context window (200K vs 128K), input pricing ($1.00 vs $0.07/M). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Related comparisons