← All Comparisons

DeepSeek V3 vs GLM-4.7

A detailed comparison of DeepSeek V3 (DeepSeek) and GLM-4.7 (Zhipu AI) across pricing, performance, and features.

Pricing Comparison

MetricDeepSeek V3GLM-4.7Difference
Input / 1M tokens$0.14$0.60+329%
Output / 1M tokens$0.28$2.20+686%
Context window164K200K
Max output16.384K128K

Benchmark Comparison

BenchmarkDeepSeek V3GLM-4.7
MMLU-Pro78%84.3%
HumanEval89%
GPQA85.7%

Capabilities

CapabilityDeepSeek V3GLM-4.7
code
reasoning
text
vision

DeepSeek V3 Strengths

  • Cheapest capable model available
  • Strong coding performance
  • Open-source

DeepSeek V3 Weaknesses

  • No vision support
  • Smaller context than competitors
  • China-based — availability concerns

GLM-4.7 Strengths

  • Excellent value — strong benchmarks at $0.60/$2.20
  • Open-weight (MIT license)
  • Top scores on AIME 25 and BrowseComp

GLM-4.7 Weaknesses

  • No tool-use support yet
  • 358B parameters — still heavy for self-hosting
  • Smaller ecosystem than OpenAI/Anthropic

Quick Verdict

Best value: DeepSeek V3 is the more affordable option at $0.14/$0.28 per 1M tokens.

Higher benchmarks: GLM-4.7 scores higher on average across available benchmarks (85.0% avg).

Larger context: GLM-4.7 supports 200K tokens.

Choose DeepSeek V3 if cost matters most. Choose GLM-4.7 if you need the best possible quality for complex tasks.

More Comparisons