GLM-4.7 vs MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed
Too close to call on our weighted score (GLM-4.7 42, MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed 41). The right pick depends on what you value most.
Z.ai (Zhipu)GLM-4.7
42/100- ECI143.5
- Price$0.60 / $2.20
- Context205K
MiniMaxMiniMax-M2.5-highspeed
41/100- ECI—
- Price$0.60 / $2.40
- Context205K
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
Too close to call
It is close. Our weighted score puts them within a point (GLM-4.7 42/100, MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed 41/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: GLM-4.7 on price. 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 priceGLM-4.7GLM-4.7 $1.00 · MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed $1.05 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextAbout the sameGLM-4.7 204,800 · MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed 204,800 tokens
- Widest inputsSame inputsGLM-4.7: Text · MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed: Text
- Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
| Measure | Weight | GLM-4.7 | MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 50 | 49 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 35 | 35 |
| Context window | 20% | 32 | 32 |
| Overall | 100% | 42/100 | 41/100 |
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) | MiniMax-M2.5-highspeedMiniMax |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | 143.5 | — |
| ECI rank | #84 of 148 | — |
| 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 | $0.60 |
| Output | $2.20 (best) | $2.40 |
| Cached input | $0.11 | $0.06 (best) |
| Blended (3:1) | $1.00 (best) | $1.05 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Z.AI API | Official MiniMax (minimax.io) API |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 204,800 tokens | 204,800 tokens |
| Max output | 131,072 tokens | 131,072 tokens |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | No |
| PDFs | No | No |
| Audio | No | No |
| Video | No | No |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | No |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | Open | Open |
| API model ID | glm-4.7 | MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed |
| API providers | 20 (best) | 7 |
| Released | Dec 22, 2025 | Feb 13, 2026 |
| 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
- MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed$10.80
Which should you choose?
Which is better: GLM-4.7 or MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed?
It is close. Our weighted score puts them within a point (GLM-4.7 42/100, MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed 41/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: GLM-4.7 on price. 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 MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed?
GLM-4.7 is cheaper at $0.60 input / $2.20 output per million tokens (official Z.AI API price). MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed costs $0.60 input / $2.40 output per million tokens (official MiniMax (minimax.io) API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $1.00 per million tokens for GLM-4.7 versus $1.05 for MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed (1.1× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. GLM-4.7 has an ECI of 143.5 and MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for GLM-4.7 and MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed 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?
GLM-4.7 and MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed share the same 204,800-token context window. Maximum output per response: GLM-4.7 up to 131,072, MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed up to 131,072 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
GLM-4.7 accepts text; MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed accepts text. They handle the same number of input types.
Are any of these open source?
Yes, both publish their weights, so you can self-host them.
Which is newer?
MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed is the newest, released Feb 13, 2026. GLM-4.7 came out Dec 22, 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 Oct 4, 2026.
Related comparisons
- Add Kimi K2 ThinkingThree-way comparison
- GLM-4.7 vs Kimi K2 ThinkingMoonshot AI · ECI 146.0
- GLM-4.7 vs Qwen3.5 35B-A3BAlibaba (Qwen) · ECI 142.5
- GLM-4.7 vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55BNVIDIA · ECI 146.2
- GLM-4.7 vs Claude Haiku 4.5Anthropic · ECI 142.4
- MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed vs DeepSeek OCR 2DeepSeek
- MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed vs Qwen3.5 122B-A10BAlibaba (Qwen)
