Skip to content

o3 Mini vs GLM 4.7

o3 Mini

OpenAI

75#83
vs
GLM 4.7

Zhipu AI

75#84
Signal-by-Signal Comparison
Signalo3 MiniDeltaGLM 4.7
Capabilities
83
+17
67
Benchmarks
76
+3
72
Pricing
96
-3
98
Context window size
84
0
84
Recency
35
-59
94
Output Capacity
83
-2
85
Overall Result
2 wins
of 6
4 wins
GLM 4.7 wins 4 of 6 signals

Score History

Score History (23 data points)
o3 MiniGLM 4.7
o3 Mini

75.3

current score

Leader

o3 Mini

right now

GLM 4.7

75.1

current score

LMMarketCap.com
Interactive Price Comparison
100Kcalls/month
1,000tokens (~1,333 chars)
500tokens (~667 chars)

o3 Mini

OpenAI

Per request$0.003300
Daily$11.00
Monthly$330.00
Annual$3960.00

GLM 4.7

Zhipu AI

Best Value
Per request$0.001275
Daily$4.25
Monthly$127.50
Annual$1530.00

GLM 4.7 saves you $202.50/month

That's $2430.00/year compared to o3 Mini at your current usage level of 100K calls/month.

61% cheaper
Choose GLM 4.7 for cost optimization

o3 Mini pricing:
Input:$1.10/M tokens
Output:$4.40/M tokens
GLM 4.7 pricing:
Input:$0.40/M tokens
Output:$1.75/M tokens
Winner
o3 Mini

OpenAI

75

Composite Score

GLM 4.7

Zhipu AI

75

Composite Score

Signal-by-Signal Comparison
Metrico3 MiniGLM 4.7Winner
Overall Score
75
75
o3 Mini
Rank#83#84
o3 Mini
Quality Rank#83#84
o3 Mini
Adoption Rank#83#84
o3 Mini
Parameters------
Context Window200K205K
GLM 4.7
Pricing$1.10/$4.40/M$0.40/$1.75/M--
Signal Scores
Capabilities
83
67
o3 Mini
Benchmarks
76
72
o3 Mini
Pricing
96
98
GLM 4.7
Context window size
84
84
GLM 4.7
Recency
35
94
GLM 4.7
Output Capacity
83
85
GLM 4.7
Benchmark Head-to-Head(12 benchmarks)
o3 Mini: 0GLM 4.7: 1
o3 Mini
GLM 4.7
Normalized 0-100%
MMLU
86.9%-
MMLU-Pro
82.5%-
GPQA Diamond
79.7%-
MATH-500
97.9%-
SWE-bench Verified
49.3%-
AIME 2024
87.3%-
IFEval
90.2%-
BBH
88.5%-
Arena Elo
13711442
LiveBench
71.5%-
HLE
20.3%-
BigCodeBench
33.1%-
Benchmark Interpretation

Our score (0-100) is driven by benchmark performance (90%) from Arena Elo ratings, MMLU, GPQA, HumanEval, SWE-bench, and 15+ standardized evaluations. Capabilities and context window serve as tiebreakers (10%). Learn more about our methodology.

o3 MiniStrong Performer

Scores 75/100 (rank #83), placing it in the top 72% of all 290 models tracked.

Raw Quality0/100
Cost Efficiency0/100
Speed0/100
GLM 4.7Strong Performer

Scores 75/100 (rank #84), placing it in the top 71% of all 290 models tracked.

Raw Quality0/100
Cost Efficiency0/100
Speed0/100

With only a 0-point gap, these models are in the same performance tier. The practical difference in output quality is minimal - your choice should depend on pricing, latency requirements, and specific feature needs.

When to Use Each Model

Choose o3 Mini when you need:

  • Step-by-step reasoning and chain-of-thought problem solving

Choose GLM 4.7 when you need:

  • High-volume production workloads where API costs must be minimized
  • Step-by-step reasoning and chain-of-thought problem solving
  • Self-hosted deployments where you need full control over the model
Cost-Performance Analysis
o3 Mini
Input cost$1.10/M tokens
Output cost$4.40/M tokens
Cost per quality point$0.073
Est. monthly (1M tokens/day)$82.50
GLM 4.7Best Value
Input cost$0.40/M tokens
Output cost$1.75/M tokens
Cost per quality point$0.029
Est. monthly (1M tokens/day)$32.25

GLM 4.7 offers 61% better value per quality point. At 1M tokens/day, you'd spend $32.25/month with GLM 4.7 vs $82.50/month with o3 Mini - a $50.25 monthly difference.

Latency & Speed
o3 MiniFaster
Speed score0/100
GLM 4.7
Speed score0/100

Both models have comparable response speeds. For most applications, the latency difference is negligible.

When latency matters most: Interactive chatbots, IDE code completion, real-time translation, and user-facing applications where response time directly impacts experience. For batch processing, background summarization, or offline analysis, latency is less critical.

Example Use Cases

Code generation & review

Based on overall model capabilities and architecture for coding tasks like generating functions, debugging, and refactoring

o3 Mini

Customer support chatbot

Suitable for user-facing chat with competitive response times. GLM 4.7 also offers lower per-token costs for high-volume support

o3 Mini

Long document analysis

Larger context window (205K tokens) can process longer documents, contracts, and research papers in a single pass

GLM 4.7

Batch data extraction

Lower output pricing ($1.75/M) reduces costs when processing thousands of records daily

GLM 4.7

Creative writing & content

Higher overall composite score (75/100) correlates with better nuance, coherence, and style in long-form content

o3 Mini
Which Should You Choose?
Our recommendation:
o3 Mini

o3 Mini and GLM 4.7 are extremely close in overall performance (only 0.20000000000000284 points apart). Your best choice depends entirely on which specific strengths matter most for your use case.

o3 Mini
Recommended

by OpenAI

  • Choose for Quality - Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
  • Choose for Reliability - Higher uptime and faster response speeds
  • Choose for Prototyping - Stronger community support and better developer experience
  • Choose for Production - Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale

by Zhipu AI

  • Choose for Cost - 61% lower pricing; better value at scale
Capability Comparison
Capabilityo3 MiniGLM 4.7
Vision (Image Input)
Function Calling
Streaming
JSON Mode
Reasoning
Web Searchdiffers
Image Output
Monthly Cost Calculator
1,000tokens (600 in / 400 out)
100requests/day (3,000/month)

o3 Mini

OpenAI

$7.26
estimated monthly cost

GLM 4.7

Zhipu AI

Best Value
$2.82
estimated monthly cost

GLM 4.7 saves you $4.44/month

That's 61% cheaper than o3 Mini at 1,000 tokens/request and 100 requests/day.

Assumes 60% input / 40% output token ratio per request. Actual costs may vary based on your usage pattern.

Parameters & Context
Parametero3 MiniGLM 4.7
Context Window200K205K
Max Output Tokens100,000131,072
Open SourceNoYes
CreatedJan 31, 2025Dec 22, 2025
Last updated: 43m ago

相关对比

o3 Mini vs GLM 4.7 (2026) | LM Market Cap