ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Nov 2, 2026

GLM-4.7 vs Baichuan M2 32B

Baichuan M2 32B comes out ahead, 58 to 41 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. Z.ai (Zhipu)

    GLM-4.7

    Released Dec 22, 2025

    41/100
    • ECI143.7
    • Price$0.60 / $2.20
    • Context205K
    Full specs Remove GLM-4.7
  2. Our pick

    Baichuan

    Baichuan M2 32B

    Released Aug 13, 2025

    58/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.07 / $0.07
    • Context131K
    Full specs Remove Baichuan M2 32B

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

Baichuan M2 32B is our pick

Baichuan M2 32B is the better all-round choice, scoring 58/100 against GLM-4.7 (41). It leads on price. GLM-4.7 wins on inputs & features and context window. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.

  • CapabilityNot enough dataNo independent benchmark covers every model here yet
  • Lowest priceBaichuan M2 32BBaichuan M2 32B $0.07 · GLM-4.7 $1.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextGLM-4.7GLM-4.7 204,800 · Baichuan M2 32B 131,072 tokens
  • Widest inputsSame inputsGLM-4.7: Text · Baichuan M2 32B: Text
  • Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
How the score is built
MeasureWeightGLM-4.7Baichuan M2 32B
Price50%48100
Inputs & features30%3510
Context window20%3225
Overall100%41/10058/100

Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.

02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

GLM-4.7 vs Baichuan M2 32B specifications side by side
SpecificationGLM-4.7Z.ai (Zhipu)Baichuan M2 32BBaichuan
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)143.7—
ECI rank#94 of 165—
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions83.3%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics83.3%—
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions32.2%—
Price per million tokens
Input$0.60$0.07 (best)
Output$2.20$0.07 (best)
Cached input$0.11—
Blended (3:1)$1.00$0.07 (best)
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceOfficial Z.AI APIMedian of 1 providers
Limits
Context window204,800 tokens (best)131,072 tokens
Max output131,072 tokens131,072 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesNoNo
PDFsNoNo
AudioNoNo
VideoNoNo
ReasoningYesYes
Tool callingYesNo
Structured outputNoNo
Availability
WeightsOpenOpenApache-2.0
API model IDglm-4.7—
API providers31 (best)1
ReleasedDec 22, 2025Aug 13, 2025
Knowledge cutoffApr 2025—
03 — Cost

What would a month cost?

Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.

  • GLM-4.7$10.40
  • Baichuan M2 32B$0.84
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: GLM-4.7 or Baichuan M2 32B?

Baichuan M2 32B is the better all-round choice, scoring 58/100 against GLM-4.7 (41). It leads on price. GLM-4.7 wins on inputs & features and context window. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.

Which is cheaper, GLM-4.7 or Baichuan M2 32B?

Baichuan M2 32B is cheaper at $0.07 input / $0.07 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider). GLM-4.7 costs $0.60 input / $2.20 output per million tokens (official Z.AI API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.07 per million tokens for Baichuan M2 32B versus $1.00 for GLM-4.7 (14× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. GLM-4.7 has an ECI of 143.7 and Baichuan M2 32B has not been scored yet.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for GLM-4.7 and Baichuan M2 32B yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Note that Baichuan M2 32B does not support tool calling, which most coding agents need.

Which has the bigger context window?

GLM-4.7 has the largest context window at 204,800 tokens, against 131,072 for Baichuan M2 32B. Maximum output per response: GLM-4.7 up to 131,072, Baichuan M2 32B up to 131,072 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

GLM-4.7 accepts text; Baichuan M2 32B accepts text. They handle the same number of input types.

Are any of these open source?

Yes, both publish their weights (Apache-2.0), so you can self-host them.

Which is newer?

GLM-4.7 is the newest, released Dec 22, 2025. Baichuan M2 32B came out Aug 13, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: GLM-4.7 Apr 2025.

How do you decide the winner?

Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Nov 2, 2026.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons