Model Comparison
GLM-4.7-Flash (Non-reasoning)
vs. Qwen2.5 Max
Comparing 2 AI models · 11 benchmarks · Z AI, Alibaba
Recommended Pick
Z GLM-4.7-Flash (Non-reasoning) 7 metric wins Strongest on: Value, Input price, Output price
Best Value
GLM-4.7-Flash (Non-reasoning)
100.0 value score
24.1 reasoning / $0.15/1M
Lowest Price
GLM-4.7-Flash (Non-reasoning)
$0.07/1M input price
Best Reasoning
Qwen2.5 Max
37.3 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
GLM-4.7-Flash (Non-reasoning)
11.0 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
GLM-4.7-Flash (Non-reasoning) has the strongest quality-to-price mix at 100.0 out of 100 value points.
Price gap
GLM-4.7-Flash (Non-reasoning) is 22.9x cheaper on input tokens than Qwen2.5 Max.
Reasoning gap
Qwen2.5 Max leads GLM-4.7-Flash (Non-reasoning) by 13.2 points on reasoning.
Top-pick rationale
GLM-4.7-Flash (Non-reasoning) wins 7 measurable categories, including Value, Input price, Output price, Blended price.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
GLM-4.7-Flash (Non-reasoning)
Z AI
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Qwen2.5 Max
Alibaba
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Full Comparison
| Metric | Top Pick Z GLM-4.7-Flash (Non-reasoning) | Al Qwen2.5 Max |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $0.07/1M | $1.60/1M |
| Output Cost | $0.40/1M | $6.40/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.15/1M | $2.80/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | Z AI | Alibaba |
| Release Date | Jan 19, 2026 | Jan 28, 2025 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | 93.1 tok/s | — |
| TTFT | 1277ms | — |
| Latency | 1277ms | — |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 100.0 | 8.4 |
| Reasoning Score | 24.1 | 37.3 |
| Intelligence | 22.1 | 16.3 |
| Coding | 11.0 | — |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 45.2% | 58.7% |
| MMLU Pro | — | 76.2% |
| HLE | 4.9% | 4.5% |
| LiveCodeBench | — | 35.9% |
| MATH 500 | — | 83.5% |
| AIME (Original) | — | 23.3% |
| SciCode | 25.5% | 33.7% |
| LCR | 14.7% | — |
| IFBench | 46.3% | — |
| TAU-bench v2 | 91.8% | — |
| TerminalBench Hard | 3.8% | — |
Key Takeaways
GLM-4.7-Flash (Non-reasoning) offers the best value at $0.07/1M, making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
Qwen2.5 Max has the strongest reasoning profile with a 37.3 reasoning score, combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
GLM-4.7-Flash (Non-reasoning) reaches a 11.0 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
GLM-4.7-Flash (Non-reasoning)
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
- Code generation
- Software development
Qwen2.5 Max
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
