ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Nov 2, 2026

Claude Haiku 4.5 vs Gemma 4 31B IT vs GLM-4.7

Gemma 4 31B IT comes out ahead, 68 to 57 and 55 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. Anthropic

    Claude Haiku 4.5

    Released Oct 15, 2025

    57/100
    • ECI142.2
    • Price$1.00 / $5.00
    • Context200K
    Full specs Remove Claude Haiku 4.5
  2. Our pick

    Google

    Gemma 4 31B IT

    Released Apr 2, 2026

    68/100
    • ECI143.1
    • Price$0.14 / $0.40
    • Context262K
    Full specs Remove Gemma 4 31B IT

  3. 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
01 — Verdict

Gemma 4 31B IT is our pick

Gemma 4 31B IT is the better all-round choice, scoring 68/100 against Claude Haiku 4.5 (57) and GLM-4.7 (55). It leads on price and context window. Claude Haiku 4.5 wins on inputs & features. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityGLM-4.7Capabilities Index (ECI): GLM-4.7 143.7 · Gemma 4 31B IT 143.1 · Claude Haiku 4.5 142.2
  • Lowest priceGemma 4 31B ITGemma 4 31B IT $0.205 · GLM-4.7 $1.00 · Claude Haiku 4.5 $2.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextGemma 4 31B ITGemma 4 31B IT 262,144 · GLM-4.7 204,800 · Claude Haiku 4.5 200,000 tokens
  • Widest inputsClaude Haiku 4.5Claude Haiku 4.5: Text, Images, PDFs · Gemma 4 31B IT: Text, Images · GLM-4.7: Text
  • Self-hostingGemma 4 31B IT and GLM-4.7Publishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightClaude Haiku 4.5Gemma 4 31B ITGLM-4.7
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%676869
Price25%347948
Inputs & features15%807035
Context window10%323732
Overall100%57/10068/10055/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

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

Claude Haiku 4.5 vs Gemma 4 31B IT vs GLM-4.7 specifications side by side
SpecificationClaude Haiku 4.5AnthropicGemma 4 31B ITGoogleGLM-4.7Z.ai (Zhipu)
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)142.2143.1143.7 (best)
ECI rank#102 of 165#96 of 165#94 of 165 (best)
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions71.2%75.8%83.3% (best)
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics66.7%73.3%83.3% (best)
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions13.2%10.4%32.2% (best)
Price per million tokens
Input$1.00$0.14 (best)$0.60
Output$5.00$0.40 (best)$2.20
Cached input$0.10 (best)—$0.11
Blended (3:1)$2.00$0.205 (best)$1.00
Long-context rateSame rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceOfficial Anthropic APIMedian of 36 providersOfficial Z.AI API
Limits
Context window200,000 tokens262,144 tokens (best)204,800 tokens
Max output64,000 tokens32,768 tokens131,072 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesYesYesNo
PDFsYesNoNo
AudioNoNoNo
VideoNoNoNo
ReasoningYesYesYes
Tool callingYesYesYes
Structured outputYesYesNo
Availability
WeightsProprietaryOpenOpen
API model IDclaude-haiku-4-5gemma-4-31b-itglm-4.7
API providers48 (best)4631
ReleasedOct 15, 2025Apr 2, 2026Dec 22, 2025
Knowledge cutoffFeb 28, 2025Jan 2025Apr 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.

  • Claude Haiku 4.5$20.00
  • Gemma 4 31B IT$2.20
  • GLM-4.7$10.40
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Claude Haiku 4.5, Gemma 4 31B IT or GLM-4.7?

Gemma 4 31B IT is the better all-round choice, scoring 68/100 against Claude Haiku 4.5 (57) and GLM-4.7 (55). It leads on price and context window. Claude Haiku 4.5 wins on inputs & features. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, Claude Haiku 4.5, Gemma 4 31B IT or GLM-4.7?

Gemma 4 31B IT is cheaper at $0.14 input / $0.40 output per million tokens (median across 36 API providers). GLM-4.7 costs $0.60 input / $2.20 output per million tokens (official Z.AI API price); Claude Haiku 4.5 costs $1.00 input / $5.00 output per million tokens (official Anthropic API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.205 per million tokens for Gemma 4 31B IT versus $1.00 for GLM-4.7 (4.9× as much) and $2.00 for Claude Haiku 4.5 (9.8× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

GLM-4.7 scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): GLM-4.7 143.7 (#94 of 165), Gemma 4 31B IT 143.1 (#96 of 165) and Claude Haiku 4.5 142.2 (#102 of 165). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (141.4–145.8 vs 140.8–145.9), so treat the gap as small. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — GLM-4.7 83.3%, Gemma 4 31B IT 75.8%, Claude Haiku 4.5 71.2%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — GLM-4.7 83.3%, Gemma 4 31B IT 73.3%, Claude Haiku 4.5 66.7%; SimpleQA Verified — GLM-4.7 32.2%, Claude Haiku 4.5 13.2%, Gemma 4 31B IT 10.4%.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Claude Haiku 4.5, Gemma 4 31B IT and GLM-4.7 yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, GLM-4.7 leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. All three support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Gemma 4 31B IT has the largest context window at 262,144 tokens, against 204,800 for GLM-4.7 and 200,000 for Claude Haiku 4.5. Maximum output per response: Claude Haiku 4.5 up to 64,000, Gemma 4 31B IT up to 32,768, GLM-4.7 up to 131,072 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Claude Haiku 4.5 accepts text, images and PDFs; Gemma 4 31B IT accepts text and images; GLM-4.7 accepts text. Claude Haiku 4.5 handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Gemma 4 31B IT and GLM-4.7 publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Claude Haiku 4.5 is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Gemma 4 31B IT is the newest, released Apr 2, 2026. GLM-4.7 came out Dec 22, 2025; Claude Haiku 4.5 came out Oct 15, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Claude Haiku 4.5 Feb 28, 2025, Gemma 4 31B IT Jan 2025, 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