GLM-4.7 vs Trinity Mini
Trinity Mini comes out ahead, 65 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
Arcee AITrinity Mini
65/100- ECI—
- Price$0.045 / $0.15
- Context131K
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
Trinity Mini is our pick
Trinity Mini is the better all-round choice, scoring 65/100 against GLM-4.7 (41). It leads on price. GLM-4.7 wins on 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 priceTrinity MiniTrinity Mini $0.071 · GLM-4.7 $1.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextGLM-4.7GLM-4.7 204,800 · Trinity Mini 131,072 tokens
- Widest inputsSame inputsGLM-4.7: Text · Trinity Mini: Text
- Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
| Measure | Weight | GLM-4.7 | Trinity Mini |
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 48 | 100 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 35 | 35 |
| Context window | 20% | 32 | 25 |
| Overall | 100% | 41/100 | 65/100 |
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) | Trinity MiniArcee AI |
|---|---|---|
| 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 | $0.045 (best) |
| Output | $2.20 | $0.15 (best) |
| Cached input | $0.11 | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $1.00 | $0.071 (best) |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Z.AI API | Median of 1 providers |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 204,800 tokens (best) | 131,072 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 | OpenOpenMDW-1.1 |
| API model ID | glm-4.7 | — |
| API providers | 31 (best) | 1 |
| Released | Dec 22, 2025 | Dec 1, 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
- Trinity Mini$0.75
Which should you choose?
Which is better: GLM-4.7 or Trinity Mini?
Trinity Mini is the better all-round choice, scoring 65/100 against GLM-4.7 (41). It leads on price. GLM-4.7 wins on 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 Trinity Mini?
Trinity Mini is cheaper at $0.045 input / $0.15 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 $0.071 per million tokens for Trinity Mini 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 Trinity Mini has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for GLM-4.7 and Trinity Mini 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 has the largest context window at 204,800 tokens, against 131,072 for Trinity Mini. Maximum output per response: GLM-4.7 up to 131,072, Trinity Mini up to 131,072 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
GLM-4.7 accepts text; Trinity Mini accepts text. They handle the same number of input types.
Are any of these open source?
Yes, both publish their weights (OpenMDW-1.1), so you can self-host them.
Which is newer?
GLM-4.7 is the newest, released Dec 22, 2025. Trinity Mini came out Dec 1, 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
- Trinity Mini vs Qwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud)Alibaba (Qwen)
- Trinity Mini vs AutoGLM Phone 9B MultilingualZ.ai (Zhipu)
