Model Comparison
V4 Flash (Reasoning, Max Effort)
vs. GLM-4.7-Flash (Reasoning)
Comparing 2 AI models · 7 benchmarks · DeepSeek, Z AI
Recommended Pick
De V4 Flash (Reasoning, Max Effort) 11 metric wins Strongest on: Value, Output price, Throughput
Best Value
V4 Flash (Reasoning, Max Effort)
100.0 value score
53.9 reasoning / $0.18/1M
Lowest Price
GLM-4.7-Flash (Reasoning)
$0.07/1M input price
Best Reasoning
V4 Flash (Reasoning, Max Effort)
53.9 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
V4 Flash (Reasoning, Max Effort)
56.2 coding index
Composite Indices
Higher is better; speed and price are normalized
Standard Benchmarks
Only benchmarks with data are shown
Differences That Matter
Best value
V4 Flash (Reasoning, Max Effort) has the strongest quality-to-price mix at 100.0 out of 100 value points.
Price gap
GLM-4.7-Flash (Reasoning) is 2.0x cheaper on input tokens than V4 Flash (Reasoning, Max Effort).
Speed gap
V4 Flash (Reasoning, Max Effort) generates about 1.3x as many tokens per second as GLM-4.7-Flash (Reasoning).
Reasoning gap
V4 Flash (Reasoning, Max Effort) leads GLM-4.7-Flash (Reasoning) by 24.6 points on reasoning.
Top-pick rationale
V4 Flash (Reasoning, Max Effort) wins 11 measurable categories, including Value, Output price, Throughput, Reasoning.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
V4 Flash (Reasoning, Max Effort)
DeepSeek
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
GLM-4.7-Flash (Reasoning)
Z AI
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Full Comparison
| Metric | Top Pick De V4 Flash (Reasoning, Max Effort) | Z GLM-4.7-Flash (Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $0.14/1M | $0.07/1M |
| Output Cost | $0.28/1M | $0.40/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.18/1M | $0.15/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | DeepSeek | Z AI |
| Release Date | Apr 24, 2026 | Jan 19, 2026 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | 110.5 tok/s | 84.1 tok/s |
| TTFT | 1080ms | 923ms |
| Latency | 51867ms | 24697ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 100.0 | 62.5 |
| Reasoning Score | 53.9 | 29.4 |
| Intelligence | 40.3 | 22.9 |
| Coding | 56.2 | — |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 89.4% | 58.1% |
| HLE | 32.1% | 7.1% |
| SciCode | 44.9% | 33.7% |
| LCR | 63.0% | 35.0% |
| IFBench | 79.2% | 60.8% |
| TAU-bench v2 | 95.0% | 98.8% |
| TerminalBench Hard | 35.6% | 22.0% |
Key Takeaways
GLM-4.7-Flash (Reasoning) offers the best value at $0.07/1M, making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
V4 Flash (Reasoning, Max Effort) has the strongest reasoning profile with a 53.9 reasoning score, combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
V4 Flash (Reasoning, Max Effort) reaches a 56.2 coding index, making it the top choice for software development and code generation tasks.
All models support context windows of ∞+ tokens, suitable for processing lengthy documents and maintaining extended conversations.
When to Choose Each Model
V4 Flash (Reasoning, Max Effort)
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
- Code generation
- Software development
GLM-4.7-Flash (Reasoning)
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
Recommended Comparisons
Popular alternatives
