Created bymario-alka.dePowered bygodcore.denoob2claw.detricoma.de
Contributed byMarcel SommerZ.ai (Zhipu)

glm-4.7-flash

Performance benchmark · measured on 04.08.2026 01:07

Benchmark-IDrun-20261021-093815-797507
Timebench 3 - Kombi (Prefill + Generation)Runtime: openclaw_cliQuantisierung: AWQ
Generation349,28tok/s
Prefill7.890,75tok/s
Time to First Token3.899,00ms
Total duration66,84s
Concurrency10parallel
Ranking in the field
558of 1427 systems

Performance benchmark · Primary metric: Generation-Speed (tok/s) · 10× concurrent

This run is better than 61 % of all comparable systems.
Generation 349,3 tok/s
-18 % vs Ø 425,3
Prefill 7.890,8 tok/s
+18 % vs Ø 6.659,3
Time to First Token 3.899 ms
-91 % vs Ø 45.848
Distribution in the field0 – 2.491 tok/s
Ø 425 Median Dieser Lauf

Wie schlägt sich dieser Benchmark mit anderen Modellen?

gemma-4-E2B-itNVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 · run-20260728-184455-e28775
2.491,2 tok/s
gemma-4-E2B-itNVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Workstation Edition · run-20260727-181606-b37ed9
2.414,4 tok/s
Nemotron-3.5-Lightning-30B-A3BNVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Ti · run-20261021-093815-dce558
2.263,7 tok/s
Nemotron-3-Nano-4BNVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Workstation Edition · run-20260727-181607-4cca42
2.182,7 tok/s
gemma-4-E2B-it3× 3x NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Max-Q Workstation Edition · run-20260728-184456-d87c73
2.143,6 tok/s
gpt-oss-20bNVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Workstation Edition · run-20260730-035052-9c966e
1.995,4 tok/s
gpt-oss-20bNVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Workstation Edition · run-20260728-140954-8007c4
1.993,5 tok/s
Nemotron-3-Nano-4B3× 3x NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Max-Q Workstation Edition · run-20260728-194136-0aed86
1.937,7 tok/s
Nemotron-3-Nano-4B3× 3x NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Max-Q Workstation Edition · run-20260728-194136-8db0fa
1.911,6 tok/s
Nemotron-3-Nano-4B3× 3x NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Max-Q Workstation Edition · run-20260727-181606-e0eafd
1.897,0 tok/s
gpt-oss-20bNVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 · run-20260729-032121-7c961d
1.890,7 tok/s
Nemotron-3-Nano-4BNVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 · run-20260728-194135-2ed9dd
1.878,7 tok/s
gpt-oss-20b3× 3x NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Max-Q Workstation Edition · run-20260728-034052-26063b
1.835,7 tok/s
Nemotron-3-Nano-4B3× 3x NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Max-Q Workstation Edition · run-20260728-194136-a77046
1.830,3 tok/s
glm-4.7-flash this runNVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Ti · run-20261021-093815-797507
349,3 tok/s

How does this benchmark compare on other GPUs?

Same model on different hardware · 10× concurrent · Generation (tok/s)

Hardware

GPU: NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Ti · 24 GB VRAM
CPU: AMD Ryzen 5 5600X 6-Core Processor
RAM: 30 GB
Mainboard: ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC. PRIME A520M-K

Setup

Runtime: openclaw_cli
Quantization: AWQ
Model: glm-4.7-flash

Configuration

benchmark-konfiguration — run-20261021-093815-797507
# LLM-Benchmark Konfiguration # Modell : glm-4.7-flash # Run-ID : run-20261021-093815-797507 # GPU : NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Ti # CPU : AMD Ryzen 5 5600X 6-Core Processor # RAM : 30 GB bench@llm-benchmark:~$ cat benchmark.conf execution_type local
execution_typelocal

All benchmarks of this model To leaderboard

Anzeige
Model comparison

glm-4.7-flash on various hardware

All published performance runs of this model – each bubble a variant: position = prefill (X) × generation (Y), bubble size = number of runs. Closer to the top right = faster. ★ Marked gold = this benchmark.

GPUby graphics card

4443332221110,02.5004.7607.0199.279Prefill (tok/s)Generation (tok/s)AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX - 151,7 tok/s Generation, 3.752 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 3.439 ms (3 Laufe)AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTXNVIDIA GB10 (DGX Spark) - 48,9 tok/s Generation, 4.055 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 536 ms (1 Lauf)NVIDIA GB10 (DGX Spar...NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Ti - 349,3 tok/s Generation, 8.028 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 1.698 ms (6 Laufe) | DIESER LAUF★ NVIDIA GeForce RTX 30...
★ NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Ti 349,3 tok/s this runAMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX 151,7 tok/sNVIDIA GB10 (DGX Spark) 48,9 tok/s

CPUby processor

4443332221110,02.5004.7607.0199.279Prefill (tok/s)Generation (tok/s)AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX 16-Cores - 151,7 tok/s Generation, 3.752 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 3.439 ms (3 Laufe)AMD Ryzen Threadrippe...NVIDIA Grace - 48,9 tok/s Generation, 4.055 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 536 ms (1 Lauf)NVIDIA GraceAMD Ryzen 5 5600X 6-Core Processor - 349,3 tok/s Generation, 8.028 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 1.698 ms (6 Laufe) | DIESER LAUF★ AMD Ryzen 5 5600X 6-C...
★ AMD Ryzen 5 5600X 6-Core Processor 349,3 tok/s this runAMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX 16-Cores 151,7 tok/sNVIDIA Grace 48,9 tok/s

MBby mainboard

4443332221110,02.5004.7607.0199.279Prefill (tok/s)Generation (tok/s)ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC. Pro WS WRX80E-SAGE SE WIFI - 151,7 tok/s Generation, 3.752 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 3.439 ms (3 Laufe)ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC....ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC. GX10 - 48,9 tok/s Generation, 4.055 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 536 ms (1 Lauf)ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC....ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC. PRIME A520M-K - 349,3 tok/s Generation, 8.028 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 1.698 ms (6 Laufe) | DIESER LAUF★ ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC....
★ ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC. PRIME A520M-K 349,3 tok/s this runASUSTeK COMPUTER INC. Pro WS WRX80E-SAGE SE WIFI 151,7 tok/sASUSTeK COMPUTER INC. GX10 48,9 tok/s

ENGby engine

42433725016477,32.3394.9307.52110.113Prefill (tok/s)Generation (tok/s)unbekannt - 349,3 tok/s Generation, 5.807 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 2.234 ms (3 Laufe)unbekanntvLLM - 211,5 tok/s Generation, 8.700 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 1.006 ms (4 Laufe)vLLMllama.cpp - 151,7 tok/s Generation, 3.752 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 3.439 ms (3 Laufe)llama.cpp
unbekannt 349,3 tok/svLLM 211,5 tok/sllama.cpp 151,7 tok/s

DRVby driver

4443332221110,03.2004.6196.0387.457Prefill (tok/s)Generation (tok/s)unbekannt - 349,3 tok/s Generation, 6.602 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 2.278 ms (9 Laufe)unbekanntNVIDIA 590.48.01 / CUDA 13.1 - 48,9 tok/s Generation, 4.055 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 536 ms (1 Lauf)NVIDIA 590.48.01 / CU...
unbekannt 349,3 tok/sNVIDIA 590.48.01 / CUDA 13.1 48,9 tok/s
💰 Economics

Economics of this run

Operating cost, TCO and comparison with the next-best runs of the same model at identical concurrency (10× concurrent). Methodology →

⚙️ ConfigurationAll metrics and charts below follow these settings – based on a 24-month runtime.Save to URLReset
⚡ Electricity price EUR/kWh
⚙️ System utilization 100 %
🖥️ Acquisition EUR
🔌 Idle 25 W
⚡ TDP 450 W
☁️ External LLM (API)
Electricity0.30 EUR/kWh
Avg power (incl. idle)450 W estimated (TDP)GPU 450 W full load
Avg cost / hourEUR 0.14
Electricity / 1M tokensEUR 0.11
Token / kWh2.79M
Acquisition (system)EUR 1,270 partial priceGPU EUR 999 · CPU EUR 121 · PSU EUR 150
Electricity (2 years)–
TCO (2 years)EUR 3,635
Output tokens (2 years)22.03B
☁️ External LLM (API) – comparison
External LLM cost (2 years)–
Savings vs. external (2 years)–

All values above and the charts below take the configured system utilization into account: at X% the system generates only X% of the time, the rest it idles (25 W). Cost per hour drops (more idle), cost per token rises.

Cost over 2 years – electricity only

Cost over 2 years – incl. acquisition (TCO)

Speed vs. tokens per euro

Euro per 1M tokens

Comparison vs. API – economics per benchmark

glm-4.7-flashNVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Tiglm-4.7-flashNVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Tiglm-4.7-flash2x AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX
Electricity cost (24 mo.)–––
Acquisition cost–––
Total cost (TCO)–––
Generated tokens (24 mo.)–––
Token price via API–––
Break-even point (days)–––
Result (savings / extra cost)–––

Comparison with up to 3 next-best runs of this model at the same concurrency (at least one on different hardware). Power = GPU TDP + CPU (idle + 15 %) + board (estimated), acquisition = full system (GPU + CPU + board + RAM + PSU), prices = stored market prices.

Contributed by

Marcel Sommer

@marcelsommer