Model comparison
GLM-4.7 vs MiMo-V2-Omni
Head-to-head evidence from 12 shared benchmark results across 5 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: GLM-4.7 #42 (Supported); MiMo-V2-Omni #40 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. GLM-4.7 and MiMo-V2-Omni share 12 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 18 results are unique to GLM-4.7; 2 to MiMo-V2-Omni.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 12
- GLM-4.7 only
- 18
- MiMo-V2-Omni only
- 2
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Pick MiMo-V2-Omni if you want the stronger benchmark profile. GLM-4.7 only becomes the better choice if coding is the priority.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 12 shared benchmark results across 5 evidence categories; 1 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
MiMo-V2-Omni has the cleaner BenchAlign overall profile here, landing at 63.15 versus 61.16. It is a real lead, but still close enough that category-level strengths matter more than the headline number.
MiMo-V2-Omni gives you the larger context window at 262K, 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 | GLM-4.7 | Δ | MiMo-V2-Omni |
|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | GLM-4.775.4 | Margin← 0.6 | MiMo-V2-Omni74.8 |
| Agentic | GLM-4.745.7 | MarginNo overlap | MiMo-V2-OmniNot measured |
| Knowledge | GLM-4.751.8 | MarginNo overlap | MiMo-V2-OmniNot measured |
| Math | GLM-4.71.8 | MarginNo overlap | MiMo-V2-OmniNot measured |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
SWE-bench Verified
CodingA 73.8%B 74.8%Winner: MiMo-V2-OmniΔ 1SWE-bench Verified: GLM-4.7 scored 73.8%; MiMo-V2-Omni scored 74.8%. MiMo-V2-Omni wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | GLM-4.7 | MiMo-V2-Omni | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | GLM-4.7$0 input / $0 output | MiMo-V2-OmniNot available | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | GLM-4.782 tok/s | MiMo-V2-OmniNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | GLM-4.71.10 s | MiMo-V2-OmniNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | GLM-4.7200K | MiMo-V2-Omni262K | MiMo-V2-Omni lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7 | MiMo-V2-Omni | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 41% | — | Not comparable |
| BrowseCompSource | 52% | — | Not comparable |
| VITA-BenchSource | 15.5% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 25.4% | — | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 95.9% | 91.2% | GLM-4.7 leads |
| Gert LabsSource | 39.95% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 33.3% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 1165 | — | Not comparable |
| Claw-EvalSource | — | 45.2% | Not comparable |
CodingGLM-4.7 wins6 benchmarks
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7 | MiMo-V2-Omni | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 85.7% | — | Not comparable |
| MMLU-ProSource | 84.3% | — | Not comparable |
| HLESource | 24.8% | — | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 33.7% | 35.0% | MiMo-V2-Omni leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 85.9% | 82.8% | GLM-4.7 leads |
| AA-HLESource | 25.1% | 19.9% | GLM-4.7 leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -34.6% | -17.4% | MiMo-V2-Omni leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 29.3% | 18.7% | GLM-4.7 leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 90.3% | 44.4% | MiMo-V2-Omni leads |
Math3 benchmarks
Multimodal2 benchmarks
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7 | MiMo-V2-Omni | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 67.9% | 53.5% | GLM-4.7 leads |
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, GLM-4.7 or MiMo-V2-Omni?
MiMo-V2-Omni is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 63.15 to 61.16. The biggest single separator in this matchup is SWE-bench Verified, where the scores are 73.8% and 74.8%.
Which is better for coding, GLM-4.7 or MiMo-V2-Omni?
GLM-4.7 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 75.4 versus 74.8. Inside this category, AA-SciCode is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
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.