Free to start

Z.ai: GLM 4.6 vs Z.ai: GLM 4.7 Flash

Try both on us. Starter credit covers your first requests, then one key routes GLM 4.6 and GLM 4.7 Flash. Switch by changing the model name.

Compare routesProviders, price, context, and policy posture in one view.

Use auto when uptime mattersKeep a primary model and let fallback handle provider failures.

Same API shapeUse the OpenAI client and set the model you want.

Practical read

Monthly evidence

Z.ai: GLM 4.6 has the larger context window. Z.ai: GLM 4.7 Flash has the lower published input-plus-output rate, more Credits provider routes and the lower measured p50 time to first token.

$2.2999/1MZ.ai: GLM 4.6 cheapest route

$0.4853/1MZ.ai: GLM 4.7 Flash cheapest route

8385 msZ.ai: GLM 4.6 fastest measured p50 TTFT via zai

886 msZ.ai: GLM 4.7 Flash fastest measured p50 TTFT via greenference

The price comparison adds each route's rate for one million input tokens and one million output tokens; your cost depends on your input/output mix. Prices and live route measurements can change. Use the monthly reports when you need a stable evidence window, then run a small task-specific eval before choosing a production default.

Z.ai: GLM 4.6Z.ai: GLM 4.7 Flash

Model idz-ai/glm-4.6z-ai/glm-4.7-flash

Publisher Z.AI Z.AI

AI IQ — —

Context202,752 tokens131,072 tokens

Credits provider routes56

Cheapest route$2.2999/1M$0.4853/1M

Cached input$0.0844/1M to $0.26164/1M$0.01055/1M to $0.03442/1M

Privacy posturehas ZDR routehas ZDR route

Fastest measured p50 TTFT8385 ms via zai886 ms via greenference

Highest measured throughputnot enough datanot enough data

Recent route uptime range100.00%100.00%

Modes chat chat

Z.ai: GLM 4.6 routes

Overview5 Credits routes
PricingInput, cached input, and output rates
ProvidersAll serving providers

Z.ai: GLM 4.7 Flash routes

Overview6 Credits routes
PricingInput, cached input, and output rates
ProvidersAll serving providers

Related comparisons

Browse every comparison

Z.ai: GLM 4.7 Flash vs Z.ai: GLM 5.339 combined provider routes
Z.ai: GLM 4.6 vs Z.ai: GLM 5.338 combined provider routes
Z.ai: GLM 4.7 Flash vs Z.ai: GLM 5.238 combined provider routes
Z.ai: GLM 4.7 Flash vs Z.ai: GLM 5.3 Flash38 combined provider routes
Z.ai: GLM 4.6 vs Z.ai: GLM 5.237 combined provider routes
Z.ai: GLM 4.6 vs Z.ai: GLM 5.3 Flash37 combined provider routes
MoonshotAI: Kimi K3 vs Z.ai: GLM 4.7 Flash34 combined provider routes
MoonshotAI: Kimi K3 vs Z.ai: GLM 4.633 combined provider routes

Production choice

Pick a default model. Keep fallback enabled.

TrustedRouter is useful when you know the model you want, but still need provider rollover, budget limits, usage records, and a prompt path you can verify.

OpenAI clientPython

client = OpenAI(
    base_url="https://api.trustedrouter.com/v1",
    api_key="sk-tr-v1-..."
)

response = client.chat.completions.create(
    model="z-ai/glm-4.6",
    messages=messages,
)

Questions

Which should I use, Z.ai: GLM 4.6 or Z.ai: GLM 4.7 Flash?

Z.ai: GLM 4.6 has the larger context window. Z.ai: GLM 4.7 Flash has the lower published input-plus-output rate, more Credits provider routes and the lower measured p50 time to first token.

Is Z.ai: GLM 4.6 or Z.ai: GLM 4.7 Flash cheaper?

The current cheapest TrustedRouter route is $2.2999/1M for Z.ai: GLM 4.6 and $0.4853/1M for Z.ai: GLM 4.7 Flash. The comparison uses current catalog prices and updates as provider pricing changes.

Is Z.ai: GLM 4.6 or Z.ai: GLM 4.7 Flash faster?

Current measured p50 time to first token is 8385 ms for Z.ai: GLM 4.6 and 886 ms for Z.ai: GLM 4.7 Flash. These are routed probe measurements, not vendor-advertised speeds, and update as new samples arrive.

Can I test Z.ai: GLM 4.6 and Z.ai: GLM 4.7 Flash with the same API?

Yes. Use the same OpenAI-compatible TrustedRouter base URL and API key, then change only the model id between z-ai/glm-4.6 and z-ai/glm-4.7-flash. This makes side-by-side evals possible without maintaining two provider integrations.