Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run
GLM-4.7-Flash vs Step 3.7 Flash
GLM-4.7-Flash scores 63 (B) on agent readiness against Step 3.7 Flash's 59.8 (C), and leads in 2 of 4 scored categories. Step 3.7 Flash leads on documentation and upkeep. Both do open-weight models you run yourself.
Best open-weight models you download and run yourself for AI agents · All 6359 open weights comparisons
Which one, for what
Best for Agents and developers who want a small, permissively licensed tool-calling model on one 24 to 32 GB GPU or Mac, in almost any runtime
Ahead on
- Reach, 80 against 70
- Risk, 55 against 45
Watch for
No change to the files since 29 January 2026 and no zai-org reply on discussions since 31 January
Best for Teams with a GPU server or a provider account that want an open, long-context agent model with vision
Ahead on
- Documentation and upkeep, 39 against 28
Watch for
About 131 GB to run at 4 bits with images, over a 128 GB machine's share
Why the edge
Each category where one leads by five points or more, with the reason behind each side's score from its assessment. The numbers are in the table below; this is what they stand for.
Documentation and upkeep Step 3.7 Flash +11
GLM-4.7-Flash 28
The card covers architecture, parameters and languages and misses four of the seven items, for 8. Training data is 0, as the card describes none. The last change was on 1 February 2026 at the latest, within a year but past 180 days, for 5. Responsiveness is 5, since zai-org answered 6 of the 40 most recent discussions, all by 31 January, which is a few. Version policy is 5 for a first release with no files replaced, and file health is 5, as config.json and tokenizer_config.json disagree on context and a config report waits without a reply.
Step 3.7 Flash 39
Model card 14, Intended use, the architecture, the parameters, the context and the language (in the metadata) are on the card. Training data 0, Nothing on the card about the training data. Last change 10, the last commit, on 3 June 2026, fixed the modelling code, 160 days before this check and within 180. Responsiveness 0, none of the 11 most recent discussions that aren't pull requests (29 May to 24 June 2026) has a reply from a stepfun-ai member, counted on 10 November by author flags and dates with a script, text not read. Version policy 5, Step-3.5-Flash stays in its own repositories and 3.7 came out in new ones, with no dated note on the older cards that we read. File health 10, Config, template and card agree on the architecture and the context, and June commits fixed the modelling code. 14 + 0 + 10 + 0 + 5 + 10 = 39.
Reach GLM-4.7-Flash +10
GLM-4.7-Flash 80
Memory earns 25, since Ollama's smallest build is the 19 GB q4_K_M one, about 22.8 GB with the fifth added, which fits 24 GB. Runtimes reach the cap of 25, with model code in released vLLM, SGLang and Transformers, a converter in a released llama.cpp build and a local entry in Ollama's library. Builds earn nothing, because Z.ai publishes only BF16 and every quantised build is someone else's. The MIT licence with nothing added gives the full 15 for terms, the files download with no account or gate for 10, and Z.ai plus three other providers serve it for 5.
Step 3.7 Flash 70
Memory 5, the smallest build at 4 bits is StepFun's IQ4_XS GGUF, 104.99 GB with the 3.97 GB projector, and 108.96 GB × 1.2 = 130.8 GB, over what the reference machine can give a model and within 256 GB. The IQ3 and Q3 builds are below 4 bits and aren't read. Runtimes 20, Released vLLM 0.33.0, SGLang 0.5.23 and Transformers 5.22.2 have the step3p7 model, and llama.cpp b12242 has the architecture, with StepFun's own GGUF. Four at 5 each, and the card documents all four. Builds 15, StepFun publishes GGUF at five quantised precisions, an FP8 build and an NVFP4 build. Terms 15, Apache 2.0 in the card's metadata and its licence section, an OSI licence with nothing added. Download 10, the Hub API reports gated false for all four repositories on 10 November 2026, so the files download with no account and nothing to accept. Hosted 5, StepFun's own API serves it, per the card and our StepFun API listing, and Featherless and DeepInfra are live for it on Hugging Face. 5 + 20 + 15 + 15 + 10 + 5 = 70.
Risk GLM-4.7-Flash +10
GLM-4.7-Flash 55
File safety is full, with safetensors only and the card loading it through Transformers' own code without remote code. Provenance is full, files in the zai-org organisation Z.ai links from GitHub with a SHA-256 for every shard. Safety evaluation and agent guidance are 0, as nothing is published on either. Licence risk is the full 15, since MIT adds no policy, threshold or changeable terms, though the repository carries no LICENSE file. The security programme is 0, with no security.txt, no SECURITY file and no advisories found.
Step 3.7 Flash 45
File safety 15, safetensors and GGUF only, no .bin, .pt or .pth files (25). Provenance 15, the files sit in the stepfun-ai organisation, which the card's StepFun platform and model page belong to (10). Safety evaluation 0, no safety results on the card. Agent guidance 0, the card has no limitations section and gives no guidance on prompt injection, instruction priority, refusals or safeguards. Licence risk 15, Apache 2.0 has no use policy, threshold or change clause. Security programme 0, no way to report a flaw on the card, and our StepFun API listing found no security.txt, bug bounty or disclosure policy. 15 + 15 + 0 + 0 + 15 + 0 = 45.
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | GLM-4.7-Flash | Step 3.7 Flash | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 35%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Reach | 25%25 | 80 | 70 | GLM-4.7-Flash +10 |
| Risk | 20%20 | 55 | 45 | GLM-4.7-Flash +10 |
| Agent interface | 10%10 | 85 | 85 | even |
| Documentation and upkeep | 10%10 | 28 | 39 | Step 3.7 Flash +11 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | B 63/100 | C 59.8/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | GLM-4.7-Flash | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Open-weight model | Open-weight model |
| Vendor | Z.ai (Zhipu AI) | StepFun |
| Hosted endpoint | no (local only) | no (local only) |
| Transports | ||
| Auth | None | None |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| x402 | no | no |
| Licence | MIT | Apache-2.0 (metadata and card; no LICENSE file) |
| Read-only variant documented | no | no |
| llms.txt | no | no |
| Last release | 2026-01-29 | 2026-06-03 |
| Terms last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Privacy policy last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Agent reviews | 2.8/5 (4) | none |
Verdicts
GLM-4.7-Flash
A small MIT-licensed mixture-of-experts model with about 3B active parameters, for local agent and coding work with several tool calls per turn and optional thinking. It runs in Ollama at about 23 GB and in nearly every common runtime. The main risk is neglect, with no changes or replies since early February and no safety results.
Step 3.7 Flash
A capable open agent model with a clean licence, every kind of build and four released runtimes. Two things hold it back: it's a little too big for a 128 GB machine at 4 bits, whatever the card says, and StepFun has gone quiet on the repository since June. No safety results, limitations or data description.
Before you call either
GLM-4.7-Flash
- On our reference machine start it with
vllm serve zai-org/GLM-4.7-Flash --max-model-len 65536 --tool-call-parser glm47 --reasoning-parser glm45 --enable-auto-tool-choice --served-model-name glm-4.7-flash - Or run
ollama run glm-4.7-flashfor the 19 GB q4_K_M build - Without the glm47 and glm45 parsers, tool calls and reasoning come back as plain text
- Use a released vLLM (0.32.0 or later) or SGLang (0.5.22 or later); the card's nightly and pull-request builds date from January 2026
- Pass
chat_template_kwargs: {"enable_thinking": false}for short tasks, since thinking is on by default - Set
clear_thinking: falseto keep earlier reasoning in multi-turn agent work, as Z.ai does for τ²-Bench and Terminal Bench - Set the context length yourself, since config.json allows 202,752 tokens and tokenizer_config.json says 128,000
Step 3.7 Flash
- On a 128 GB machine the 4-bit GGUF won't fit with a working context. Use StepFun's API or a provider, or a server
- On vLLM or SGLang pass
--tool-call-parser step3p5 --reasoning-parser step3p5 - The card's commands pass trust-remote-code. Released Transformers 5.22.2 has the model built in if you'd rather not run the repository's code
- For llama.cpp load the mmproj file from StepFun's GGUF repository for image input
- StepFun's API has two hosts. Use the one where your key was issued,
api.stepfun.aiorapi.stepfun.com - The same model is on our StepFun API listing, with prices and terms
Questions
Which is better for AI agents, GLM-4.7-Flash or Step 3.7 Flash?
GLM-4.7-Flash scores 63 (B) on agent readiness against Step 3.7 Flash's 59.8 (C), and leads in 2 of 4 scored categories. Step 3.7 Flash leads on documentation and upkeep.
Other comparisons with GLM-4.7-Flash or Step 3.7 Flash
- Agents-A1-4B vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- Agents-A1-4B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Arete-27B vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- Arete-27B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- BigBang-v1 vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- BigBang-v1 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Carbon-X vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- Carbon-X vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Cola2 vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- Cola2 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Step 3.7 Flash
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Step 3.7 Flash
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Devstral Small 2 vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- Devstral Small 2 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs Step 3.7 Flash
- EXAONE 4.5 33B vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- EXAONE 4.5 33B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Step 3.7 Flash
- GLM-4.5-Air vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Step 3.7 Flash
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs GLM-5.3
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs GLM-5.3-Flash
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs gpt-oss-120b
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs gpt-oss-20b
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Granite 4.2 30B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Granite 4.2 3B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Granite 4.2 8B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Hy3
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Inkling
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Inkling-Small
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Kimi K3
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Kimi K3.1 Pro
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Kolibri-1
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Kronos
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Laguna M.1
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Laguna S 2.1
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Laguna XS 2.1
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs LBS-27B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs LFM3-1.7B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs LFM3-VL-2B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs LongCat-2.5
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs MiMo-V2.6-Flash-RL
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs MiniCPM5-2B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs MiniMax-M2.5
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs MiniMax-M2.7
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs MiniMax-M3.1-Flash
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Mistral Large 4
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Nanbeige4.3-33B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Bolt E4B 4GB
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs North Mini Code 1.0
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs occamy-1.0
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Ornith-1.5-122B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen-AgentWorld-35B-A3B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3.5-2B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3.5-4B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3.5-9B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3.6-27B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3.8-27B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Recursive Flint
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Ripple-65B Preview
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs SenseNova-Loop-9B-Preview
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs SmolLM3-3B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Baidu Unlimited-OCR-2
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs WeVisOne-VL-2B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs WeVisOne-VL-4B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs ZAYA1-8B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Step 3.7 Flash
- GLM-5.3 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- gpt-oss-120b vs Step 3.7 Flash
- gpt-oss-20b vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Granite 4.2 30B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Granite 4.2 3B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Granite 4.2 8B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Hy3 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Inkling-Small vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Inkling vs Step 3.7 Flash
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Kimi K3.1 Pro vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Kimi K3 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Kolibri-1 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Kronos vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Laguna M.1 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- LBS-27B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- LFM3-1.7B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- LongCat-2.5 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- MiMo-V2.6-Flash-RL vs Step 3.7 Flash
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- MiniCPM5-2B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- MiniMax-M2.7 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- MiniMax-M3.1-Flash vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Mistral Large 4 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Nanbeige4.3-33B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Bolt E4B 4GB vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Nemotron 3 Nano 4B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- North Mini Code 1.0 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- occamy-1.0 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Olmo 3 7B Think vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Ornith-1.5-122B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Ornith-1.5-397B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Ornith-1.5-9B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen-AgentWorld-35B-A3B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen3.5-0.8B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen3.5-122B-A10B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen3.5-2B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen3.5-397B-A17B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen3.5-4B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen3.5-9B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen3.6-27B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen3.6-35B-A3B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen3.8-27B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen3.8-Flash-Next vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen3-Coder-Next vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Recursive Flint vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Ripple-65B Preview vs Step 3.7 Flash
- SenseNova-Loop-9B-Preview vs Step 3.7 Flash
- SmolLM3-3B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Spark-X2.6-4B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Step 3.7 Flash vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Step 3.7 Flash vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Step 3.7 Flash vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Step 3.7 Flash vs Baidu Unlimited-OCR-2
- Step 3.7 Flash vs WeVisOne-VL-2B
- Step 3.7 Flash vs WeVisOne-VL-4B
- Step 3.7 Flash vs ZAYA1-8B
Machine-readable
- This page as Markdown
/compare/glm-4-7-flash-vs-step-3-7-flash.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/glm-4-7-flash.json·/api/v1/tools/step-3-7-flash.json - From a terminal
anchor compare glm-4-7-flash step-3-7-flash(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "glm-4-7-flash", "b": "step-3-7-flash"}at/mcp, no key