Qwen3.5vsGLM-4.7
Qwen3.5 | GLM-4.7 | |
|---|---|---|
| Specifications | ||
Parameters | 397B | — |
Context window | 1M | 128k |
| Benchmarks | ||
Coding SWE-Bench VerifiedReal coding tasks pulled from open-source projects — the AI has to find and fix actual bugs. A human-checked version of the original SWE-Bench. Higher is better. | 76.4%Best | 73.8% |
Multilingual coding SWE-Bench MultilingualLike SWE-Bench, but the coding problems span many programming languages, not just one. Tests how broadly the AI can code. Higher is better. | 69.3% | — |
Agentic terminal coding Terminal-Bench 2.0Can the AI work in a command-line terminal — running commands and finishing technical setup tasks the way a developer would? (Version 2.0 of the test.) Higher is better. | 52.5%Best | 41% |
Web browsing BrowseCompCan the AI browse the web and track down hard-to-find answers? Higher is better. | 69%Best | 52% |
Multidisciplinary reasoning Humanity's Last Exam · no toolsHumanity's Last Exam — extremely hard expert questions across many subjects, written so you can't just look up the answer. “No tools” means the AI answers on its own. Higher is better. | 28.7%Best | 24.8% |
Multidisciplinary reasoning Humanity's Last Exam · with toolsHumanity's Last Exam — extremely hard expert questions across many subjects. “With tools” means the AI is allowed to search the web or run code while answering. Higher is better. | — | 42.8% |
Science GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions in biology, physics, and chemistry — hard enough that subject-matter PhDs score around 65%. Higher is better. | 88.4%Best | 85.7% |
Agentic computer use OSWorld-VerifiedCan the AI actually operate a computer — clicking, typing, and using real apps — to finish tasks on its own? Higher is better. | 62.2% | — |
Chart reasoning CharXiv ReasoningCan the AI read and reason about complex charts and figures, not just text? Higher is better. | 80.8% | — |
Multimodal reasoning MMMU-ProA tougher version of MMMU — college-level questions that mix images, diagrams, and text together. Higher is better. | 79% | — |
Multimodal MMMUTests the AI on understanding images and text together across many college subjects. Higher is better. | 85% | — |
Community preference (code) Arena Elo (Code)Like the text arena, but people vote on which AI writes better code. The votes become a chess-style Elo rating on arena.ai. Higher is better. | — | 1433 |
| Overview | ||
| Company | Qwen | Z.ai |
| Release date | Feb 16 2026 | Dec 22 2025 |
| Access | Open Weight | Open Weight |
Which is better: Qwen3.5 or GLM-4.7?
Qwen3.5 leads GLM-4.7 on 5 of the 5 benchmarks they both report. GLM-4.7 shipped 56 days before Qwen3.5, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
Context windows are 1M (Qwen3.5) vs 128k (GLM-4.7).
On SWE-Bench Verified, Qwen3.5 leads at 76.4% vs GLM-4.7 at 73.8%. On Terminal-Bench 2.0, Qwen3.5 leads at 52.5% vs GLM-4.7 at 41%. On BrowseComp, Qwen3.5 leads at 69% vs GLM-4.7 at 52%. On Humanity's Last Exam · no tools, Qwen3.5 leads at 28.7% vs GLM-4.7 at 24.8%. On GPQA Diamond, Qwen3.5 leads at 88.4% vs GLM-4.7 at 85.7%.
Frequently asked questions
Qwen3.5 was released by Qwen on Feb 16 2026.
GLM-4.7 was released by Z.ai on Dec 22 2025.
Qwen3.5 leads on SWE-Bench Verified — Qwen3.5 76.4% vs GLM-4.7 73.8%.
Qwen3.5 leads on Humanity's Last Exam · no tools — Qwen3.5 28.7% vs GLM-4.7 24.8%.
Qwen3.5 has a 1M context window; GLM-4.7 has 128k.