Model comparison
GLM-4.7 vs Ornith-1.0-35B
Head-to-head evidence from 2 shared benchmark results across 2 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: GLM-4.7 #42 (Supported); Ornith-1.0-35B unranked (Not scored). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. GLM-4.7 and Ornith-1.0-35B share 2 comparable benchmark results. 2 of 8 categories are comparable. 28 results are unique to GLM-4.7; 5 to Ornith-1.0-35B.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 2
- GLM-4.7 only
- 28
- Ornith-1.0-35B only
- 5
- Comparable categories
- 2 / 8
Treat this as a split decision. GLM-4.7 makes more sense if coding is the priority; Ornith-1.0-35B is the better fit if agentic is the priority or you need the larger 256K context window.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 2 shared benchmark results across 2 evidence categories; 2 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 and Ornith-1.0-35B finish on the same BenchAlign overall score, so this is less about a single winner and more about where the edge shows up. The BenchAlign headline says tie; the benchmark table is where the real choice happens.
Ornith-1.0-35B gives you the larger context window at 256K, 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 | Ornith-1.0-35B |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agentic | GLM-4.745.7 | Margin→ 18.5 | Ornith-1.0-35B64.2 |
| Coding | GLM-4.775.4 | Margin← 9.5 | Ornith-1.0-35B65.9 |
| Knowledge | GLM-4.751.8 | MarginNo overlap | Ornith-1.0-35BNot measured |
| Math | GLM-4.71.8 | MarginNo overlap | Ornith-1.0-35BNot measured |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
Terminal-Bench 2.0
AgenticA 41%B 64.2%Winner: Ornith-1.0-35BΔ 23.2Terminal-Bench 2.0: GLM-4.7 scored 41%; Ornith-1.0-35B scored 64.2%. Ornith-1.0-35B wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
SWE-bench Verified
CodingA 73.8%B 75.6%Winner: Ornith-1.0-35BΔ 1.8SWE-bench Verified: GLM-4.7 scored 73.8%; Ornith-1.0-35B scored 75.6%. Ornith-1.0-35B wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | GLM-4.7 | Ornith-1.0-35B | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | GLM-4.7$0 input / $0 output | Ornith-1.0-35B$0 input / $0 output | Listed prices are equal. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | GLM-4.782 tok/s | Ornith-1.0-35BNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | GLM-4.71.10 s | Ornith-1.0-35BNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | GLM-4.7200K | Ornith-1.0-35B256K | Ornith-1.0-35B lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticOrnith-1.0-35B wins9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7 | Ornith-1.0-35B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 41% | 64.2% | Ornith-1.0-35B leads |
| BrowseCompSource | 52% | — | Not comparable |
| VITA-BenchSource | 15.5% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 25.4% | — | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 95.9% | — | Not comparable |
| Gert LabsSource | 39.95% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 33.3% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 1165 | — | Not comparable |
| Claw-EvalSource | — | 69.8% | Not comparable |
CodingGLM-4.7 wins10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7 | Ornith-1.0-35B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 73.8% | 75.6% | Ornith-1.0-35B leads |
| LiveCodeBenchSource | 84.9% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE-RebenchSource | 58.7% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | 45.3% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 45.1% | — | Not comparable |
| AA LiveCodeBenchSource | 89.4% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench ProSource | — | 50.4% | Not comparable |
| SWE MultilingualSource | — | 69.3% | Not comparable |
| NL2RepoSource | — | 34.6% | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 64.2% | Not comparable |
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7 | Ornith-1.0-35B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 85.7% | — | Not comparable |
| MMLU-ProSource | 84.3% | — | Not comparable |
| HLESource | 24.8% | — | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 33.7% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 85.9% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | 25.1% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -34.6% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 29.3% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 90.3% | — | Not comparable |
Math3 benchmarks
Multimodal1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7 | Ornith-1.0-35B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | 1255 | — | Not comparable |
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GLM-4.7 | Ornith-1.0-35B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 67.9% | — | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Which is better, GLM-4.7 or Ornith-1.0-35B?
GLM-4.7 and Ornith-1.0-35B are tied on the BenchAlign overall score, so the right pick depends on which category matters most for your use case.
Which is better for coding, GLM-4.7 or Ornith-1.0-35B?
GLM-4.7 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 75.4 versus 65.9. Inside this category, SWE-bench Verified is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for agentic tasks, GLM-4.7 or Ornith-1.0-35B?
Ornith-1.0-35B has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 64.2 versus 45.7. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 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.