Skip to main content
BenchLM
Advertise

Model comparison

DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) vs GLM-4.7

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 22 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

53.95/100
Margin
7.2pts
winning →
61.16/100
3 category wins1 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) #92 (Estimated); GLM-4.7 #42 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) and GLM-4.7 share 22 comparable benchmark results. 4 of 8 categories are comparable. 16 results are unique to DeepSeek V4 Flash (High); 8 to GLM-4.7.

Updated July 23, 2026
Shared results
22
DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) only
16
GLM-4.7 only
8
Comparable categories
4 / 8

Pick GLM-4.7 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) only becomes the better choice if mathematics is the priority or you need the larger 1M context window.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 22 shared benchmark results across 6 evidence categories; 4 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

GLM-4.7 is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 61.16 to 53.95. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.

GLM-4.7's sharpest advantage is in coding, where it averages 75.4 against 68.5. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is Terminal-Bench 2.0, 56.6% to 41%. DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) does hit back in mathematics, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.

DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) is also the more expensive model on tokens at $0.14 input / $0.28 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for GLM-4.7. That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone. DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 200K for GLM-4.7.

Category breakdown

Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.

Category scores and score margins for DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) and GLM-4.7
CategoryDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)ΔGLM-4.7
MathDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)91.9Margin← 90.1GLM-4.71.8
AgenticDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)55.3Margin← 9.6GLM-4.745.7
CodingDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)68.5Margin→ 6.9GLM-4.775.4
KnowledgeDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)52.1Margin← 0.3GLM-4.751.8

Decisive benchmark drivers

The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.

More
A · DeepSeek V4 Flash (High)B · GLM-4.7

  1. Terminal-Bench 2.0

    Agentic
    Source ↗
    A 56.6%B 41%
    Winner: DeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Δ 15.6
    Terminal-Bench 2.0: DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) scored 56.6%; GLM-4.7 scored 41%. DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) wins this benchmark.

  2. SWE-bench Verified

    Coding
    Source ↗
    A 78.6%B 73.8%
    Winner: DeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Δ 4.8
    SWE-bench Verified: DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) scored 78.6%; GLM-4.7 scored 73.8%. DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) wins this benchmark.

  3. HLE

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 29.4%B 24.8%
    Winner: DeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Δ 4.6
    HLE: DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) scored 29.4%; GLM-4.7 scored 24.8%. DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) wins this benchmark.

  4. MMLU-Pro

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 86.4%B 84.3%
    Winner: DeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Δ 2.1
    MMLU-Pro: DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) scored 86.4%; GLM-4.7 scored 84.3%. DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) wins this benchmark.

  5. GPQA

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 87.4%B 85.7%
    Winner: DeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Δ 1.7
    GPQA: DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) scored 87.4%; GLM-4.7 scored 85.7%. DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

MetricDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)GLM-4.7Comparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)$0.14 input / $0.28 outputGLM-4.7$0 input / $0 outputGLM-4.7 has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per secondDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Not availableGLM-4.782 tok/sA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Not availableGLM-4.71.10 sA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)1MGLM-4.7200KDeepSeek V4 Flash (High) lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

AgenticDeepSeek V4 Flash (High) wins
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)GLM-4.7Result
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 56.6%41%DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads
BrowseCompSource 53.5%52%DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads
HLE w/ toolsSource 40.3%—Not comparable
MCP AtlasSource 67.4%—Not comparable
ToolathlonSource 43.5%—Not comparable
τ²-bench resultsSource 95.6%95.9%GLM-4.7 leads
AA Agentic IndexSource 28.2%25.4%DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads
GDPval-AASource 32.4%33.3%GLM-4.7 leads
GDPval-AASource 11471165GLM-4.7 leads
VITA-BenchSource —15.5%Not comparable
Gert LabsSource —39.95%Not comparable
CodingGLM-4.7 wins
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)GLM-4.7Result
CodeforcesSource 2816.0—Not comparable
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 78.6%73.8%DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads
SWE-bench ProSource 52.3%—Not comparable
SWE MultilingualSource 70.2%—Not comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 56.6%—Not comparable
AA-SciCodeSource 42.0%45.1%GLM-4.7 leads
AA Coding IndexSource 52.0%45.3%DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads
LiveCodeBenchSource —84.9%Not comparable
SWE-RebenchSource —58.7%Not comparable
AA LiveCodeBenchSource —89.4%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)GLM-4.7Result
MRCR 1MSource 76.9%—Not comparable
CorpusQA 1MSource 59.3%—Not comparable
AA-LCRSource 62.7%64.0%GLM-4.7 leads
CritPtSource 3.4%1.7%DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads
KnowledgeDeepSeek V4 Flash (High) wins
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)GLM-4.7Result
MMLU-ProSource 86.4%84.3%DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads
SimpleQASource 28.9%—Not comparable
Chinese-SimpleQASource 73.2%—Not comparable
GPQASource 87.4%85.7%DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads
GPQA-DSource 87.4%—Not comparable
HLESource 29.4%24.8%DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 37.5%33.7%DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 86.7%85.9%DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads
AA-HLESource 27.8%25.1%DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -22.3%-34.6%DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 35.5%29.3%DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 89.7%90.3%DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads
MathDeepSeek V4 Flash (High) wins
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)GLM-4.7Result
HMMT Feb 2026Source 91.9%—Not comparable
IMOAnswerBenchSource 85.1%—Not comparable
ApexSource 19.1%—Not comparable
Apex ShortlistSource 72.1%—Not comparable
AIME 2025Source —95.7%Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source —2.439%Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source —0.000%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)GLM-4.7Result
Design Arena WebsiteSource 12381255GLM-4.7 leads
Inst. Following
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)GLM-4.7Result
AA-IFBenchSource 73.5%67.9%DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads
Frequently Asked Questions (5)

Which is better, DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) or GLM-4.7?

GLM-4.7 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 61.16 to 53.95. The biggest single separator in this matchup is Terminal-Bench 2.0, where the scores are 56.6% and 41%.

Which is better for knowledge tasks, DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) or GLM-4.7?

DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 52.1 versus 51.8. Inside this category, AA-Omniscience Index is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for coding, DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) or GLM-4.7?

GLM-4.7 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 75.4 versus 68.5. Inside this category, AA Coding Index is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for math, DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) or GLM-4.7?

DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 91.9 versus 1.8. GLM-4.7 stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.

Which is better for agentic tasks, DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) or GLM-4.7?

DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 55.3 versus 45.7. Inside this category, GDPval-AA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Explore More

DeepSeek Compare Pricing Methodology Find Your Best LLM Overall Rankings
Last updated: July 23, 2026

Choose a model with this week’s evidence

Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.

One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.