← All Comparisons
Llama 4 Scout vs GLM-4.7
A detailed comparison of Llama 4 Scout (Meta) and GLM-4.7 (Zhipu AI) across pricing, performance, and features.
Pricing Comparison
| Metric | Llama 4 Scout | GLM-4.7 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / 1M tokens | $0.18 | $0.60 | +233% |
| Output / 1M tokens | $0.63 | $2.20 | +249% |
| Context window | 10M | 200K | — |
| Max output | 32K | 128K | — |
Benchmark Comparison
| Benchmark | Llama 4 Scout | GLM-4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| MMLU-Pro | 74.2% | 84.3% |
| HumanEval | 86% | — |
| GPQA | — | 85.7% |
Capabilities
| Capability | Llama 4 Scout | GLM-4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| code | ✓ | ✓ |
| reasoning | ✗ | ✓ |
| text | ✓ | ✓ |
| vision | ✓ | ✓ |
Llama 4 Scout Strengths
- ✓10M token context — largest available
- ✓Open-source
- ✓Ultra cheap via API providers
Llama 4 Scout Weaknesses
- ✗Lower benchmarks than Maverick
- ✗Limited tool-use support
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: Llama 4 Scout is the more affordable option at $0.18/$0.63 per 1M tokens.
Higher benchmarks: GLM-4.7 scores higher on average across available benchmarks (85.0% avg).
Larger context: Llama 4 Scout supports 10M tokens.
Choose Llama 4 Scout if cost matters most. Choose GLM-4.7 if you need the best possible quality for complex tasks.