ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Nov 2, 2026

Codestral 25.08 vs GLM-4.5-Air vs Qwen Plus

Qwen Plus comes out ahead, 54 to 48 and 47 on our weighted score, though GLM-4.5-Air is 29% cheaper per token.

  1. Mistral AI

    Codestral 25.08

    Released Jul 30, 2025

    47/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.30 / $0.90
    • Context128K
    Full specs Remove Codestral 25.08

  2. Z.ai (Zhipu)

    GLM-4.5-Air

    Released Jul 28, 2025

    48/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.20 / $1.10
    • Context131K
    Full specs Remove GLM-4.5-Air
  3. Our pick

    Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen Plus

    Released Jan 25, 2024

    54/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.40 / $1.20
    • Context1M
    Full specs Remove Qwen Plus
01 — Verdict

Qwen Plus is our pick

Qwen Plus is the better all-round choice, scoring 54/100 against GLM-4.5-Air (48) and Codestral 25.08 (47). It leads on inputs & features and context window. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.

  • CapabilityNot enough dataNo independent benchmark covers every model here yet
  • Lowest priceGLM-4.5-AirGLM-4.5-Air $0.425 · Codestral 25.08 $0.45 · Qwen Plus $0.60 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextQwen PlusQwen Plus 1,000,000 · GLM-4.5-Air 131,072 · Codestral 25.08 128,000 tokens
  • Widest inputsSame inputsCodestral 25.08: Text · GLM-4.5-Air: Text · Qwen Plus: Text
  • Self-hostingGLM-4.5-AirPublishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightCodestral 25.08GLM-4.5-AirQwen Plus
Price50%646558
Inputs & features30%353545
Context window20%242560
Overall100%47/10048/10054/100

Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.

02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

Codestral 25.08 vs GLM-4.5-Air vs Qwen Plus specifications side by side
SpecificationCodestral 25.08Mistral AIGLM-4.5-AirZ.ai (Zhipu)Qwen PlusAlibaba (Qwen)
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)———
ECI rank———
Price per million tokens
Input$0.30$0.20 (best)$0.40
Output$0.90 (best)$1.10$1.20
Cached input$0.03 (best)$0.03 (best)$0.08
Blended (3:1)$0.45$0.425 (best)$0.60
Long-context rateSame rateSame rateOver 256K: $1.20 / $3.60
Price sourceOfficial Mistral APIOfficial Z.AI APIOfficial Alibaba API
Limits
Context window128,000 tokens131,072 tokens1,000,000 tokens (best)
Max output8,192 tokens98,304 tokens (best)32,768 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesNoNoNo
PDFsNoNoNo
AudioNoNoNo
VideoNoNoNo
ReasoningNoYesYes
Tool callingYesYesYes
Structured outputYesNoYes
Availability
WeightsProprietaryOpenProprietary
API model IDcodestral-2508glm-4.5-airqwen-plus
API providers1119 (best)10
ReleasedJul 30, 2025Jul 28, 2025Jan 25, 2024
Knowledge cutoff—Apr 2025Apr 2024
03 — Cost

What would a month cost?

Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.

  • Codestral 25.08$4.80
  • GLM-4.5-Air$4.20
  • Qwen Plus$6.40
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Codestral 25.08, GLM-4.5-Air or Qwen Plus?

Qwen Plus is the better all-round choice, scoring 54/100 against GLM-4.5-Air (48) and Codestral 25.08 (47). It leads on inputs & features and context window. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.

Which is cheaper, Codestral 25.08, GLM-4.5-Air or Qwen Plus?

GLM-4.5-Air is cheaper at $0.20 input / $1.10 output per million tokens (official Z.AI API price). Codestral 25.08 costs $0.30 input / $0.90 output per million tokens (official Mistral API price); Qwen Plus costs $0.40 input / $1.20 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.425 per million tokens for GLM-4.5-Air versus $0.45 for Codestral 25.08 (1.1× as much) and $0.60 for Qwen Plus (1.4× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Codestral 25.08 has not been scored yet, GLM-4.5-Air has not been scored yet and Qwen Plus has not been scored yet.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Codestral 25.08, GLM-4.5-Air and Qwen Plus yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. All three support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen Plus has the largest context window at 1,000,000 tokens, against 131,072 for GLM-4.5-Air and 128,000 for Codestral 25.08. Maximum output per response: Codestral 25.08 up to 8,192, GLM-4.5-Air up to 98,304, Qwen Plus up to 32,768 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Codestral 25.08 accepts text; GLM-4.5-Air accepts text; Qwen Plus accepts text. They handle the same number of input types.

Are any of these open source?

GLM-4.5-Air publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Codestral 25.08 and Qwen Plus is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Codestral 25.08 is the newest, released Jul 30, 2025. GLM-4.5-Air came out Jul 28, 2025; Qwen Plus came out Jan 25, 2024. Knowledge cutoff: GLM-4.5-Air Apr 2025, Qwen Plus Apr 2024.

How do you decide the winner?

Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Nov 2, 2026.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons