GLM-4.7 vs Grok 4.1 Fast
Grok 4.1 Fast comes out ahead, 66 to 41 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.
Z.ai (Zhipu)GLM-4.7
41/100- ECI143.7
- Price$0.60 / $2.20
- Context205K
- Our pick
xAIGrok 4.1 Fast
66/100- ECI—
- Price$0.20 / $0.50
- Context2M
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
Grok 4.1 Fast is our pick
Grok 4.1 Fast is the better all-round choice, scoring 66/100 against GLM-4.7 (41). It leads on price, 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 priceGrok 4.1 FastGrok 4.1 Fast $0.275 · GLM-4.7 $1.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextGrok 4.1 FastGrok 4.1 Fast 2,000,000 · GLM-4.7 204,800 tokens
- Widest inputsGrok 4.1 FastGLM-4.7: Text · Grok 4.1 Fast: Text, Images
- Self-hostingGLM-4.7Publishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | GLM-4.7 | Grok 4.1 Fast |
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 48 | 73 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 35 | 50 |
| Context window | 20% | 32 | 72 |
| Overall | 100% | 41/100 | 66/100 |
Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | GLM-4.7Z.ai (Zhipu) | Grok 4.1 FastxAI |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | 143.7 | — |
| ECI rank | #94 of 165 | — |
| GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions | 83.3% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics | 83.3% | — |
| SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions | 32.2% | — |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $0.60 | $0.20 (best) |
| Output | $2.20 | $0.50 (best) |
| Cached input | $0.11 | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $1.00 | $0.275 (best) |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Z.AI API | Median of 6 providers |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 204,800 tokens | 2,000,000 tokens (best) |
| Max output | 131,072 tokens (best) | 30,000 tokens |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | Yes |
| PDFs | No | No |
| Audio | No | No |
| Video | No | No |
| Reasoning | Yes | No |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | No |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| API model ID | glm-4.7 | — |
| API providers | 31 (best) | 8 |
| Released | Dec 22, 2025 | Nov 19, 2025 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Apr 2025 | — |
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
- Grok 4.1 Fast$3.00
Which should you choose?
Which is better: GLM-4.7 or Grok 4.1 Fast?
Grok 4.1 Fast is the better all-round choice, scoring 66/100 against GLM-4.7 (41). It leads on price, 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 Grok 4.1 Fast?
Grok 4.1 Fast is cheaper at $0.20 input / $0.50 output per million tokens (median across 6 API providers). 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 $0.275 per million tokens for Grok 4.1 Fast versus $1.00 for GLM-4.7 (3.6× 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 Grok 4.1 Fast has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for GLM-4.7 and Grok 4.1 Fast yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
Grok 4.1 Fast has the largest context window at 2,000,000 tokens, against 204,800 for GLM-4.7. Maximum output per response: GLM-4.7 up to 131,072, Grok 4.1 Fast up to 30,000 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
GLM-4.7 accepts text; Grok 4.1 Fast accepts text and images. Grok 4.1 Fast handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
GLM-4.7 publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Grok 4.1 Fast is proprietary.
Which is newer?
GLM-4.7 is the newest, released Dec 22, 2025. Grok 4.1 Fast came out Nov 19, 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.
Related comparisons
- Add Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507Three-way comparison
- GLM-4.7 vs Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507Alibaba (Qwen) · ECI 143.8
- GLM-4.7 vs Kimi K2 ThinkingMoonshot AI · ECI 145.9
- GLM-4.7 vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55BNVIDIA · ECI 146.0
- GLM-4.7 vs Gemini 3.5 Flash LiteGoogle · ECI 145.0
- Grok 4.1 Fast vs GLM-4.6V-FlashZ.ai (Zhipu)
- Grok 4.1 Fast vs Nemotron Nano 12B v2 VLNVIDIA
