Pick GLM 4.7 for genuinely permissive open weights — an mit-licensed 358b mixture-of-experts with no commercial restrictions or strong agentic coding for the price — 73.8% on swe-bench verified undercut most closed frontier models at launch. Pick MAI-Thinking-1 for very strong math reasoning (aime 2025 97%, aime 2026 94.5%) or microsoft's first in-house flagship reasoner, trained without openai distillation. Choose GLM 4.7 if you need self-hosting or data privacy; MAI-Thinking-1 if you want a managed API.
GLM 4.7 (Z.ai, China) and MAI-Thinking-1 (Microsoft, US) line up two different AI ecosystems against each other — a comparison that is as much about cost philosophy and openness as raw capability. GLM 4.7 is an MIT-licensed 358B open mixture-of-experts with strong 73.8% SWE-Bench Verified coding — but two generations behind GLM 5.2. MAI-Thinking-1 is microsoft's first fully in-house flagship reasoning model — a Claude-class reasoner built independently to cut its OpenAI dependence. They diverge most on price, context window and open vs. closed weights — each quantified below from the models' real specs.
Key differences
Cost model: GLM 4.7 ships open weights you can self-host (hardware cost only, no per-token fee), while MAI-Thinking-1 is API-metered at Not published. Your choice depends on whether you want zero marginal cost at the price of running infrastructure.
Context window: MAI-Thinking-1 holds 1.3× more — 256K (~384 pages) vs 200K (~304 pages). But effective recall usually fades long before the advertised ceiling, so the bigger number only helps if the model reasons over it.
Recency: MAI-Thinking-1 is the newer model by about 5 months (released June 2, 2026), usually meaning fresher training data and capabilities.
Ecosystem: this is a China-vs-US matchup — they differ in pricing philosophy, data-residency options, and tooling ecosystems, not only benchmarks.
Specifications
Spec
GLM 4.7
MAI-Thinking-1
Provider
Z.ai (China)
Microsoft (US)
Released
December 22, 2025
June 2, 2026
Context window
200K (~304 pages)
256K (~384 pages)
Price (in/out)
$0.6/$2.2 per 1M tokens
Not published
Open weight?
Yes — self-hostable
No — API only
Modalities
text, code
text, code
SWE-Bench Verified
73.8%
Not published
MRCR v2 @ 1M
Not published
Not published
Who wins what
Genuinely permissive open weights — an MIT-licensed 358B mixture-of-experts with no commercial restrictions: GLM 4.7 — Open weights make this possible at all — MAI-Thinking-1 is API-only, so it cannot leave the vendor's servers.
Strong agentic coding for the price — 73.8% on SWE-Bench Verified undercut most closed frontier models at launch: GLM 4.7 — MAI-Thinking-1 is comparatively weak here — closed and in private preview — no open weights, no published pricing, thin availability
An unusually generous 128K maximum output, which suits bulk refactors and long generation: GLM 4.7 — An MIT-licensed 358B open mixture-of-experts with strong 73.8% SWE-Bench Verified coding — but two generations behind GLM 5.2 — and its weights are open while MAI-Thinking-1 is API-only.
Very strong math reasoning (AIME 2025 97%, AIME 2026 94.5%): MAI-Thinking-1 — Microsoft's first fully in-house flagship reasoning model — a Claude-class reasoner built independently to cut its OpenAI dependence — and it carries the larger 256K context.
Microsoft's first in-house flagship reasoner, trained without OpenAI distillation: MAI-Thinking-1 — Microsoft's first fully in-house flagship reasoning model — a Claude-class reasoner built independently to cut its OpenAI dependence — and it is the newer of the two.
Efficient reasoning at low token cost for its class: MAI-Thinking-1 — Its 256K window holds about 1.3× more than GLM 4.7's 200K in a single prompt.
Lowest cost at scale: MAI-Thinking-1 — Its weights are open, so at volume you pay for your own hardware instead of GLM 4.7's $0.6/$2.2 per 1M tokens.
Largest single-prompt input: MAI-Thinking-1 — Its 256K window is about 1.3× larger than GLM 4.7's 200K, fitting roughly 384 pages in one prompt.
Which should you pick?
A cost-sensitive startup shipping high volume: MAI-Thinking-1 — At Not published it undercuts GLM 4.7, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.
Someone analysing very long documents or codebases: MAI-Thinking-1 — Larger 256K window fits more in one prompt.
A team with data-privacy or self-hosting needs: GLM 4.7 — Open weights let you run it on your own hardware; MAI-Thinking-1 is API-only.
Anyone whose priority is genuinely permissive open weights — an mit-licensed 358b mixture-of-experts with no commercial restrictions: GLM 4.7 — It is specifically built for that.
Anyone whose priority is very strong math reasoning (aime 2025 97%, aime 2026 94.5%): MAI-Thinking-1 — That is its strongest area.
An enterprise with regional data-residency rules: MAI-Thinking-1 or GLM 4.7 — Origin (China vs US) affects where data is processed and which compliance regime applies — check the provider's terms for your region.
GLM 4.7: where it fits
An MIT-licensed 358B open mixture-of-experts with strong 73.8% SWE-Bench Verified coding — but two generations behind GLM 5.2. Released December 22, 2025 by Z.ai, it is built for genuinely permissive open weights — an MIT-licensed 358B mixture-of-experts with no commercial restrictions, strong agentic coding for the price — 73.8% on SWE-Bench Verified undercut most closed frontier models at launch, an unusually generous 128K maximum output, which suits bulk refactors and long generation, and cheap long-running agent loops thanks to aggressive prompt caching.
Its trade-offs are real: two generations behind — GLM 5, 5.1 and 5.2 have all shipped since, and new builds should default to those, its Verified lead narrows sharply on harder evaluations like SWE-Bench Pro, and text-only with no vision, and self-hosting a 358B model is a serious hardware commitment. At $0.6 in / $2.2 out per million tokens, it sits in the budget price band.
MAI-Thinking-1: where it fits
Microsoft's first fully in-house flagship reasoning model — a Claude-class reasoner built independently to cut its OpenAI dependence. Released June 2, 2026 by Microsoft, it is built for very strong math reasoning (AIME 2025 97%, AIME 2026 94.5%), microsoft's first in-house flagship reasoner, trained without OpenAI distillation, efficient reasoning at low token cost for its class, and competitive with Claude Opus 4.6 on SWE-Bench Pro (vendor-reported).
Its trade-offs: closed and in private preview — no open weights, no published pricing, thin availability, and benchmarks are largely self-reported.
The bottom line for this matchup
The defining split here is open vs. closed. GLM 4.7 gives you weights you control — self-host it, fine-tune it, keep data in-house, pay only for hardware. MAI-Thinking-1 gives you a managed, always-updated API with no infrastructure to run. Teams with GPUs, privacy requirements, or huge volume often favour the open model; teams that want zero ops and the latest capabilities favour the closed one. Capability is close enough that this operational question, not the benchmark, usually decides it.
Frequently asked questions
Is GLM 4.7 or MAI-Thinking-1 better for coding?
Public SWE-Bench figures are not available for MAI-Thinking-1, so the honest test is your own repository — run an identical real bug through both. By design, GLM 4.7 leans toward genuinely permissive open weights — an mit-licensed 358b mixture-of-experts with no commercial restrictions while MAI-Thinking-1 leans toward very strong math reasoning (aime 2025 97%, aime 2026 94.5%), and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.
Which is cheaper, GLM 4.7 or MAI-Thinking-1?
GLM 4.7 is open-weight, so self-hosting means no per-token fee (you pay for hardware instead), while MAI-Thinking-1 is API-metered at Not published. For most teams without GPUs, the API model is cheaper to start; at very high volume, self-hosting can win.
Which has the bigger context window?
MAI-Thinking-1 — 256K vs 200K, about 1.3× larger. Useful only if the model actually reasons over the full window, which not all do.
Can I use both GLM 4.7 and MAI-Thinking-1 together?
Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you GLM 4.7, MAI-Thinking-1 and 40+ others under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day), so you can draft with one and cross-check with the other instead of buying two subscriptions.
Which is newer, GLM 4.7 or MAI-Thinking-1?
MAI-Thinking-1 — released June 2, 2026, about 5 months after GLM 4.7.
GLM 4.7 vs MAI-Thinking-1
Z.ai · China | Microsoft · US · Updated June 2026
Quick verdict
Pick GLM 4.7 for genuinely permissive open weights — an mit-licensed 358b mixture-of-experts with no commercial restrictions or strong agentic coding for the price — 73.8% on swe-bench verified undercut most closed frontier models at launch. Pick MAI-Thinking-1 for very strong math reasoning (aime 2025 97%, aime 2026 94.5%) or microsoft's first in-house flagship reasoner, trained without openai distillation. Choose GLM 4.7 if you need self-hosting or data privacy; MAI-Thinking-1 if you want a managed API.
GLM 4.7 (Z.ai, China) and MAI-Thinking-1 (Microsoft, US) line up two different AI ecosystems against each other — a comparison that is as much about cost philosophy and openness as raw capability. GLM 4.7 is an MIT-licensed 358B open mixture-of-experts with strong 73.8% SWE-Bench Verified coding — but two generations behind GLM 5.2. MAI-Thinking-1 is microsoft's first fully in-house flagship reasoning model — a Claude-class reasoner built independently to cut its OpenAI dependence. They diverge most on price, context window and open vs. closed weights — each quantified below from the models' real specs.
Key differences at a glance
▸Cost model: GLM 4.7 ships open weights you can self-host (hardware cost only, no per-token fee), while MAI-Thinking-1 is API-metered at Not published. Your choice depends on whether you want zero marginal cost at the price of running infrastructure.
▸Context window: MAI-Thinking-1 holds 1.3× more — 256K (~384 pages) vs 200K (~304 pages). But effective recall usually fades long before the advertised ceiling, so the bigger number only helps if the model reasons over it.
▸Recency: MAI-Thinking-1 is the newer model by about 5 months (released June 2, 2026), usually meaning fresher training data and capabilities.
▸Ecosystem: this is a China-vs-US matchup — they differ in pricing philosophy, data-residency options, and tooling ecosystems, not only benchmarks.
Side-by-side specs
Spec
GLM 4.7
MAI-Thinking-1
Provider
Z.ai (China)
Microsoft (US)
Released
December 22, 2025
June 2, 2026
Context window
200K (~304 pages)
256K (~384 pages)
Price (in/out)
$0.6/$2.2 per 1M tokens
Not published
Open weight?
Yes — self-hostable
No — API only
Modalities
text, code
text, code
SWE-Bench Verified
73.8%
Not published
MRCR v2 @ 1M
Not published
Not published
Who wins what
Genuinely permissive open weights — an MIT-licensed 358B mixture-of-experts with no commercial restrictions
GLM 4.7
Open weights make this possible at all — MAI-Thinking-1 is API-only, so it cannot leave the vendor's servers.
Strong agentic coding for the price — 73.8% on SWE-Bench Verified undercut most closed frontier models at launch
GLM 4.7
MAI-Thinking-1 is comparatively weak here — closed and in private preview — no open weights, no published pricing, thin availability
An unusually generous 128K maximum output, which suits bulk refactors and long generation
GLM 4.7
An MIT-licensed 358B open mixture-of-experts with strong 73.8% SWE-Bench Verified coding — but two generations behind GLM 5.2 — and its weights are open while MAI-Thinking-1 is API-only.
Very strong math reasoning (AIME 2025 97%, AIME 2026 94.5%)
MAI-Thinking-1
Microsoft's first fully in-house flagship reasoning model — a Claude-class reasoner built independently to cut its OpenAI dependence — and it carries the larger 256K context.
Microsoft's first in-house flagship reasoner, trained without OpenAI distillation
MAI-Thinking-1
Microsoft's first fully in-house flagship reasoning model — a Claude-class reasoner built independently to cut its OpenAI dependence — and it is the newer of the two.
Efficient reasoning at low token cost for its class
MAI-Thinking-1
Its 256K window holds about 1.3× more than GLM 4.7's 200K in a single prompt.
Lowest cost at scale
MAI-Thinking-1
Its weights are open, so at volume you pay for your own hardware instead of GLM 4.7's $0.6/$2.2 per 1M tokens.
Largest single-prompt input
MAI-Thinking-1
Its 256K window is about 1.3× larger than GLM 4.7's 200K, fitting roughly 384 pages in one prompt.
Which should you pick?
A cost-sensitive startup shipping high volume
→ MAI-Thinking-1
At Not published it undercuts GLM 4.7, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.
Someone analysing very long documents or codebases
→ MAI-Thinking-1
Larger 256K window fits more in one prompt.
A team with data-privacy or self-hosting needs
→ GLM 4.7
Open weights let you run it on your own hardware; MAI-Thinking-1 is API-only.
Anyone whose priority is genuinely permissive open weights — an mit-licensed 358b mixture-of-experts with no commercial restrictions
→ GLM 4.7
It is specifically built for that.
Anyone whose priority is very strong math reasoning (aime 2025 97%, aime 2026 94.5%)
→ MAI-Thinking-1
That is its strongest area.
An enterprise with regional data-residency rules
→ MAI-Thinking-1 or GLM 4.7
Origin (China vs US) affects where data is processed and which compliance regime applies — check the provider's terms for your region.
GLM 4.7: where it fits
An MIT-licensed 358B open mixture-of-experts with strong 73.8% SWE-Bench Verified coding — but two generations behind GLM 5.2. Released December 22, 2025 by Z.ai, it is built for genuinely permissive open weights — an MIT-licensed 358B mixture-of-experts with no commercial restrictions, strong agentic coding for the price — 73.8% on SWE-Bench Verified undercut most closed frontier models at launch, an unusually generous 128K maximum output, which suits bulk refactors and long generation, and cheap long-running agent loops thanks to aggressive prompt caching.
Its trade-offs are real: two generations behind — GLM 5, 5.1 and 5.2 have all shipped since, and new builds should default to those, its Verified lead narrows sharply on harder evaluations like SWE-Bench Pro, and text-only with no vision, and self-hosting a 358B model is a serious hardware commitment. At $0.6 in / $2.2 out per million tokens, it sits in the budget price band.
MAI-Thinking-1: where it fits
Microsoft's first fully in-house flagship reasoning model — a Claude-class reasoner built independently to cut its OpenAI dependence. Released June 2, 2026 by Microsoft, it is built for very strong math reasoning (AIME 2025 97%, AIME 2026 94.5%), microsoft's first in-house flagship reasoner, trained without OpenAI distillation, efficient reasoning at low token cost for its class, and competitive with Claude Opus 4.6 on SWE-Bench Pro (vendor-reported).
Its trade-offs: closed and in private preview — no open weights, no published pricing, thin availability, and benchmarks are largely self-reported.
The bottom line for this matchup
The defining split here is open vs. closed. GLM 4.7 gives you weights you control — self-host it, fine-tune it, keep data in-house, pay only for hardware. MAI-Thinking-1 gives you a managed, always-updated API with no infrastructure to run. Teams with GPUs, privacy requirements, or huge volume often favour the open model; teams that want zero ops and the latest capabilities favour the closed one. Capability is close enough that this operational question, not the benchmark, usually decides it.
Want both GLM 4.7 and MAI-Thinking-1 without two subscriptions? LumiChats gives you these plus 40+ models under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day) — draft with one, cross-check with the other.
Public SWE-Bench figures are not available for MAI-Thinking-1, so the honest test is your own repository — run an identical real bug through both. By design, GLM 4.7 leans toward genuinely permissive open weights — an mit-licensed 358b mixture-of-experts with no commercial restrictions while MAI-Thinking-1 leans toward very strong math reasoning (aime 2025 97%, aime 2026 94.5%), and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.
Which is cheaper, GLM 4.7 or MAI-Thinking-1?
GLM 4.7 is open-weight, so self-hosting means no per-token fee (you pay for hardware instead), while MAI-Thinking-1 is API-metered at Not published. For most teams without GPUs, the API model is cheaper to start; at very high volume, self-hosting can win.
Which has the bigger context window?
MAI-Thinking-1 — 256K vs 200K, about 1.3× larger. Useful only if the model actually reasons over the full window, which not all do.
Can I use both GLM 4.7 and MAI-Thinking-1 together?
Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you GLM 4.7, MAI-Thinking-1 and 40+ others under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day), so you can draft with one and cross-check with the other instead of buying two subscriptions.
Which is newer, GLM 4.7 or MAI-Thinking-1?
MAI-Thinking-1 — released June 2, 2026, about 5 months after GLM 4.7.
Specifications and benchmarks reflect publicly reported figures as of June 2026 and may change as providers release updates. Always verify on your own workload.