← All Comparisons
Claude Sonnet 4.6 vs GLM-4.7
A detailed comparison of Claude Sonnet 4.6 (Anthropic) and GLM-4.7 (Zhipu AI) across pricing, performance, and features.
Pricing Comparison
| Metric | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | GLM-4.7 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / 1M tokens | $3.00 | $0.60 | -80% |
| Output / 1M tokens | $15.00 | $2.20 | -85% |
| Context window | 200K | 200K | — |
| Max output | 16K | 128K | — |
Benchmark Comparison
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | GLM-4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| MMLU-Pro | 86% | 84.3% |
| HumanEval | 94% | — |
| GPQA | 70% | 85.7% |
Capabilities
| Capability | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | GLM-4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| code | ✓ | ✓ |
| reasoning | ✓ | ✓ |
| text | ✓ | ✓ |
| tool-use | ✓ | ✗ |
| vision | ✓ | ✓ |
Claude Sonnet 4.6 Strengths
- ✓Opus 4.5 quality at 1/5th the cost
- ✓Best value for production workloads
- ✓1M context in beta
Claude Sonnet 4.6 Weaknesses
- ✗Long context pricing doubles above 200K
- ✗Slightly below Opus 4.6 on hardest tasks
GLM-4.7 Strengths
- ✓Excellent value — strong benchmarks at $0.60/$2.20
- ✓Open-weight (MIT license)
- ✓Top scores on AIME 25 and BrowseComp
GLM-4.7 Weaknesses
- ✗No tool-use support yet
- ✗358B parameters — still heavy for self-hosting
- ✗Smaller ecosystem than OpenAI/Anthropic
Quick Verdict
Best value: GLM-4.7 is the more affordable option at $0.6/$2.2 per 1M tokens.
Higher benchmarks: GLM-4.7 scores higher on average across available benchmarks (85.0% avg).
Choose GLM-4.7 if cost matters most. Choose Claude Sonnet 4.6 if you need the best possible quality for complex tasks.