Why is this comparison indexable?

It has 6 verifiable comparison points, and both models have pricing or benchmark data.

Are missing metrics invented?

No. Metrics without LMSpeed data are omitted from this report.

Back to models

Data points: 56

Key Takeaways

The readout for GLM-4.6V Flash and GLM-4.7, before the detailed comparison sheet.

Decision read

Tie

Tie currently has the stronger profile, with verified wins split 3 to 3.

Evidence depth

56 data points

Includes 0 benchmark rows, 0 audit samples, and 10 provider examples.

Selection signal

Tie

The charts below split 10 high-signal samples across speed, scores, and audit health.

Model compare GLM-4.6V Flash vs GLM-4.7 glm-4-6v-flash-vs-glm-4-7	Model A GLM-4.6V Flash	Model B GLM-4.7
Overall leader	Tie	Tie
Verified metric wins	3 wins	3 wins
Where it leads	Average speed, First-token latency, Free providers	Cheapest input price, Provider coverage, Recent tests

Model compare

GLM-4.6V Flash vs GLM-4.7

glm-4-6v-flash-vs-glm-4-7

Model A

GLM-4.6V Flash

Model B

GLM-4.7

Overall leader

Tie

Verified metric wins

3 wins

Where it leads

Average speed, First-token latency, Free providers

Cheapest input price, Provider coverage, Recent tests

Benchmark score comparison

Third-party benchmark profile synced into LMSpeed; only metrics available for both models are shown.

Metric	GLM-4.6V Flash	GLM-4.7
No shared benchmark metrics are available yet.

API audit comparison

Latest completed audits from shared providers, with four safety and integrity score groups plus report links.

Provider	GLM-4.6V Flash	GLM-4.7
No completed audits are available from shared providers yet.

Provider examples

Speed aggregates and input/output pricing share each provider row for real API selection and migration cost checks.

Provider	GLM-4.6V Flash	GLM-4.7
50 tests	GLM-4.6V Flash speed / latency 137 tok/s / 9865ms input / output No data

When to choose each model

This report only uses LMSpeed data for GLM-4.6V Flash and GLM-4.7: pricing, speed aggregates, third-party benchmark scores, and shared provider samples.

Guidance	GLM-4.6V Flash	GLM-4.7
When to choose each model	GLM-4.6V Flash GLM-4.6V Flash is stronger when you prioritize Average speed, First-token latency, Free providers.	GLM-4.7 GLM-4.7 is stronger when you prioritize Cheapest input price, Provider coverage, Recent tests.

FAQ

TL;DR: Tie leads across 56 verifiable data points, including pricing, speed, latency, benchmarks, and provider examples.

Why is this comparison indexable?: It has 6 verifiable comparison points, and both models have pricing or benchmark data.
Are missing metrics invented?: No. Metrics without LMSpeed data are omitted from this report.

Continue from GLM-4.6V Flash vs GLM-4.7 into nearby model comparisons with enough verified LMSpeed data.

Model metadata	No OpenRouter metadata is available yet for this model.	GLM-4.7 exposes 202.8K tokens; notable signals: Text input, Text output, Tool calling, Structured outputs.
Developer	Zhipu AI	No data
Context window	No data	202.8K tokens
Max output	No data	131.1K tokens
Released	No data	Dec 2025
Modalities	No data	Input Text Output Text
Features	None listed	Text inputText outputTool callingStructured outputsJSON modeReasoning
Parameters	No data	No data
Tokenizer	No data	Other
Knowledge cutoff	No data	No data
OpenRouter ID	No data	z-ai/glm-4.7
References	No data	No data