ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Nov 2, 2026

GLM-4.7 vs Claude Haiku 5.5

Claude Haiku 5.5 comes out ahead, 83 to 55 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. Z.ai (Zhipu)

    GLM-4.7

    Released Dec 22, 2025

    55/100
    • ECI143.7
    • Price$0.60 / $2.20
    • Context205K
    Full specs Remove GLM-4.7
  2. Our pick

    Anthropic

    Claude Haiku 5.5

    Released Oct 7, 2026New

    83/100
    • ECI160.4
    • Price$0.10 / $0.50
    • Context1M
    Full specs Remove Claude Haiku 5.5

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

Claude Haiku 5.5 is our pick

Claude Haiku 5.5 is the better all-round choice, scoring 83/100 against GLM-4.7 (55). It leads on capability, price, inputs & features and context window. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityClaude Haiku 5.5Capabilities Index (ECI): Claude Haiku 5.5 160.4 · GLM-4.7 143.7
  • Lowest priceClaude Haiku 5.5Claude Haiku 5.5 $0.20 · GLM-4.7 $1.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextClaude Haiku 5.5Claude Haiku 5.5 1,000,000 · GLM-4.7 204,800 tokens
  • Widest inputsClaude Haiku 5.5GLM-4.7: Text · Claude Haiku 5.5: Text, Images, PDFs
  • Self-hostingGLM-4.7Publishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightGLM-4.7Claude Haiku 5.5
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%6989
Price25%4880
Inputs & features15%3580
Context window10%3260
Overall100%55/10083/100
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 Claude Haiku 5.5 specifications side by side
SpecificationGLM-4.7Z.ai (Zhipu)Claude Haiku 5.5Anthropic
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)143.7160.4 (best)
ECI rank#94 of 165#14 of 165 (best)
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions83.3%89.7% (best)
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics—75.1%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics83.3%98.9% (best)
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions32.2% (best)23.8%
Price per million tokens
Input$0.60$0.10 (best)
Output$2.20$0.50 (best)
Cached input$0.11$0.01 (best)
Blended (3:1)$1.00$0.20 (best)
Long-context rateSame rateOver 100K: $0.50 / $2.50
Price sourceOfficial Z.AI APIOfficial Anthropic API
Limits
Context window204,800 tokens1,000,000 tokens (best)
Max output131,072 tokens (best)128,000 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesNoYes
PDFsNoYes
AudioNoNo
VideoNoNo
ReasoningYesYeslow · medium · high · xhigh · max
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputNoYes
Availability
WeightsOpenProprietary
API model IDglm-4.7claude-haiku-5-5
API providers3133 (best)
ReleasedDec 22, 2025Oct 7, 2026
Knowledge cutoffApr 2025Jun 2026
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
  • Claude Haiku 5.5$2.00
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: GLM-4.7 or Claude Haiku 5.5?

Claude Haiku 5.5 is the better all-round choice, scoring 83/100 against GLM-4.7 (55). It leads on capability, price, inputs & features and context window. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, GLM-4.7 or Claude Haiku 5.5?

Claude Haiku 5.5 is cheaper at $0.10 input / $0.50 output per million tokens (official Anthropic API price). 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 $0.20 per million tokens for Claude Haiku 5.5 versus $1.00 for GLM-4.7 (5× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

Claude Haiku 5.5 scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Claude Haiku 5.5 160.4 (#14 of 165) and GLM-4.7 143.7 (#94 of 165). Their confidence ranges do not overlap (157.3–163.8 vs 141.4–145.8), so the gap is a real one. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — Claude Haiku 5.5 89.7%, GLM-4.7 83.3%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — Claude Haiku 5.5 98.9%, GLM-4.7 83.3%; SimpleQA Verified — GLM-4.7 32.2%, Claude Haiku 5.5 23.8%.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for GLM-4.7 and Claude Haiku 5.5 yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Claude Haiku 5.5 leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Haiku 5.5 has the largest context window at 1,000,000 tokens, against 204,800 for GLM-4.7. Maximum output per response: GLM-4.7 up to 131,072, Claude Haiku 5.5 up to 128,000 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

GLM-4.7 accepts text; Claude Haiku 5.5 accepts text, images and PDFs. Claude Haiku 5.5 handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

GLM-4.7 publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Claude Haiku 5.5 is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Claude Haiku 5.5 is the newest, released Oct 7, 2026. GLM-4.7 came out Dec 22, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: GLM-4.7 Apr 2025, Claude Haiku 5.5 Jun 2026.

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