llmrun

GLM 4.7 — Benchmarks

Benchmark scores for GLM 4.7 aggregated from public leaderboards (15 boards), with how it ranks among open models and how it compares with its nearest neighbours. See hardware requirements for what you need to run it.

llmrun Composite Score →

109.1

90% range 105.3–112.8 · from 13 boards

GLM 4.7 reasoning benchmarks

Multi-step logic and problem-solving — can the model think through a hard problem rather than recall an answer.

  • GPQA Diamond

    83.3%

    median 54.0%open leader 93.1%

    Overall best: Gemini 4 Argon (high) 96.4%

    76th percentile · #24 of 98 open · #107 of 300 all

    Independent

    Epoch AI ·

  • SimpleBench

    47.7%

    median 40.8%open leader 61.1%

    Overall best: Claude Fable 5 Max 81.9%

    67th percentile · #9 of 25 open · #54 of 101 all

    Independent

    Epoch AI ·

  • Chess Puzzles

    21.0%

    median 21.0%open leader 48.0%

    Overall best: GPT 6 Astra Promax 76.0%

    46th percentile · #8 of 14 open · #90 of 146 all

    Independent

    Epoch AI ·

  • CL-bench

    15.9%

    median 15.9%open leader 19.3%

    Overall best: GPT 5.4 (Mar 05, 2026, xhigh) 27.9%

    50th percentile · #4 of 7 open · #16 of 22 all

    Lab-reported

    Epoch AI ·

  • CL-bench Life

    10.9%

    median 10.2%open leader 13.5%

    Overall best: GPT 5.5 (high) 22.2%

    60th percentile · #3 of 6 open · #13 of 17 all

    Lab-reported

    Epoch AI ·

  • CritPt

    1.7%

    median 1.1%open leader 26.6%

    Overall best: GPT 5.6 Sol Max 32.3%

    58th percentile · #29 of 66 open · #149 of 219 all

    Lab-reported

    Epoch AI ·

  • Vending-Bench 2

    2376.8

    median 2376.8open leader 8313.8

    Overall best: GPT 6 Astra (unspecified) 15514.7

    50th percentile · #9 of 17 open · #50 of 69 all

    Lab-reported

    Epoch AI ·

GLM 4.7 coding benchmarks

Writing, editing, and fixing real code — measured by whether the resulting program actually runs and passes tests.

  • Terminal-Bench

    33.4%

    median 31.7%open leader 52.4%

    Overall best: GPT 5.5 (unspecified) 84.7%

    53rd percentile · #8 of 16 open · #40 of 57 all

    Lab-reported

    Epoch AI ·

  • SciCode

    45.1%

    median 38.7%open leader 60.9%

    Overall best: Claude Opus 5.5 Max 66.9%

    69th percentile · #21 of 66 open · #138 of 207 all

    Lab-reported

    Epoch AI ·

  • ALE-Bench

    399.5

    median 694.1open leader 1524.5

    Overall best: GPT 6 Astra Max 2951.3

    19th percentile · #35 of 43 open · #105 of 122 all

    Lab-reported

    Epoch AI ·

Other results (1)leaderboard-only, not part of the llmrun Score
  • LMArena WebDev

    1435.3

    median 1411.4open leader 1655.2

    Overall best: Claude Opus 5.5 (Max) 1807.3

    53rd percentile · #25 of 52 open · #81 of 138 all

    Arena

    Arena ·

GLM 4.7 math benchmarks

Symbolic and quantitative problem-solving, from competition math to multi-step calculation.

  • AIME 2024/2025

    83.3%

    median 52.8%open leader 98.6%

    Overall best: Claude Fable 5 (high) 100.0%

    75th percentile · #22 of 86 open · #107 of 283 all

    Independent

    Epoch AI ·

  • ProofBench

    6.0%

    median 17.0%open leader 87.0%

    Overall best: Claude Fable 5.1 Max 100.0%

    26th percentile · #20 of 26 open · #73 of 82 all

    Lab-reported

    Epoch AI ·

GLM 4.7 knowledge benchmarks

Breadth and depth of factual knowledge across many subjects, paired with the reasoning to apply it.

  • SimpleQA

    32.2%

    median 36.5%open leader 56.6%

    Overall best: Gemini 4 Argon (high) 76.0%

    13th percentile · #15 of 17 open · #66 of 91 all

    Independent

    Epoch AI ·

GLM 4.7 instruction following benchmarks

How precisely a model obeys explicit, verifiable instructions — format, length, and content constraints — and, more broadly, how much people prefer its responses head-to-head in blind human voting.

  • LMArena Text

    1441.3

    median 1321.5open leader 1487.1

    Overall best: Gemini 4 Argon (High) 1523.9

    91st percentile · #18 of 187 open · #94 of 405 all

    Arena

    Arena ·

Score vs VRAM in the ≤256 GB tier

  • GLM 4.7
  • Other models
  • Best Score for its VRAM

#18 of 84 that fit ≤256 GB

Each dot is a model at the best quant that fits ≤256 GB. The line joins the models with the best Score for their VRAM; a dot below it is beaten by a model that needs no more memory.

Full ≤256 GB ranking →

GLM 4.7 vs its neighbours

Same boards for the nearest open models per llmrun Score. The highest score in each row is marked.

BoardGLM 4.7this modelQwen3.8 27Bbest in classQ4_K_M · 18 GBDeepSeek V4 Flashnearest by ScoreQ4_K_M · 175 GBDeepSeek V3.2 Expnearest by ScoreQ4_K_M · 413 GBMiMo V2.5nearest by ScoreQ4_K_M · 188 GB
llmrun Score109.1122.1109.3109.0108.3
SimpleBench47.7%—46.3%——
CL-bench15.9%——13.2%—
CL-bench Life10.9%——9.5%—
CritPt1.7%5.4%7.1%2.9%3.7%
Vending-Bench 22376.8——1034.0—
SciCode45.1%46.6%44.9%38.9%43.1%
ALE-Bench399.5—678.2—514.0
ProofBench6.0%16.0%——16.0%
LMArena Text1441.31437.81438.71425.11433.8
Compare head to headCompareCompareCompareCompare

Scores aggregated from public benchmark sources (Epoch AI: 13 boards, Arena: 2 boards) — each linked from the benchmark pages. llmrun does not run these benchmarks. Percentiles and ranks are among open models in the llmrun catalogue; the median and leader marks refer to the same field.