ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs GLM-5.3-Flash vs Qwen3.8 27B

Too close to call on our weighted score (GLM-5.3-Flash 80, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 78, Qwen3.8 27B 67). The right pick depends on what you value most.

  1. DeepSeek

    DeepSeek V4.1 Flash

    Released Sep 10, 2026

    78/100
    • ECI155.0
    • Price$0.15 / $0.60
    • Context1M
  2. Z.ai (Zhipu)

    GLM-5.3-Flash

    Released Aug 26, 2026

    80/100
    • ECI151.9
    • Price$0.15 / $0.50
    • Context1M
  3. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3.8 27B

    Released Aug 14, 2026

    67/100
    • ECI149.4
    • Price$0.40 / $2.50
    • Context262K
01 — Verdict

Too close to call

It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 2 points (GLM-5.3-Flash 80/100, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 78/100, Qwen3.8 27B 67/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash for raw capability and GLM-5.3-Flash on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityDeepSeek V4.1 FlashCapabilities Index (ECI): DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 155.0 · GLM-5.3-Flash 151.9 · Qwen3.8 27B 149.4
  • Lowest priceGLM-5.3-FlashGLM-5.3-Flash $0.237 · DeepSeek V4.1 Flash $0.263 · Qwen3.8 27B $0.925 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextDeepSeek V4.1 Flash and GLM-5.3-FlashDeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1,000,000 · GLM-5.3-Flash 1,000,000 · Qwen3.8 27B 262,144 tokens
  • Widest inputsGLM-5.3-FlashDeepSeek V4.1 Flash: Text, Images · GLM-5.3-Flash: Text, Images, PDFs, Video · Qwen3.8 27B: Text, Images, Video
  • Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
How the score is built
MeasureWeightDeepSeek V4.1 FlashGLM-5.3-FlashQwen3.8 27B
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%848177
Price25%777951
Inputs & features15%709080
Context window10%606037
Overall100%78/10080/10067/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

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

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs GLM-5.3-Flash vs Qwen3.8 27B specifications side by side
SpecificationDeepSeek V4.1 FlashDeepSeekGLM-5.3-FlashZ.ai (Zhipu)Qwen3.8 27BAlibaba (Qwen)
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)155.0 (best)151.9149.4
ECI rank#29 of 148 (best)#42 of 148#53 of 148
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions—90.2%—
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics—55.8%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics—93.9%—
Price per million tokens
Input$0.15 (best)$0.15 (best)$0.40
Output$0.60$0.50 (best)$2.50
Cached input$0.003 (best)$0.03—
Blended (3:1)$0.263$0.237 (best)$0.925
Long-context rateSame rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceOfficial DeepSeek APIOfficial Z.AI APIMedian of 39 providers
Limits
Context window1,000,000 tokens (best)1,000,000 tokens (best)262,144 tokens
Max output384,000 tokens (best)131,072 tokens32,768 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesYesYesYes
PDFsNoYesNo
AudioNoNoNo
VideoNoYesYes
ReasoningYeslow · high · maxYeslow · high · maxYes
Tool callingYesYesYes
Structured outputYesYesYes
Availability
WeightsOpenMITOpenOpen
API model IDdeepseek-flashglm-5.3-flash—
API providers5065 (best)41
ReleasedSep 10, 2026Aug 26, 2026Aug 14, 2026
Knowledge cutoffMay 2025——
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.

  • DeepSeek V4.1 Flash$2.70
  • GLM-5.3-Flash$2.50
  • Qwen3.8 27B$9.00
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash, GLM-5.3-Flash or Qwen3.8 27B?

It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 2 points (GLM-5.3-Flash 80/100, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 78/100, Qwen3.8 27B 67/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash for raw capability and GLM-5.3-Flash on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash, GLM-5.3-Flash or Qwen3.8 27B?

GLM-5.3-Flash is cheaper at $0.15 input / $0.50 output per million tokens (official Z.AI API price). DeepSeek V4.1 Flash costs $0.15 input / $0.60 output per million tokens (official DeepSeek API price); Qwen3.8 27B costs $0.40 input / $2.50 output per million tokens (median across 39 API providers). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.237 per million tokens for GLM-5.3-Flash versus $0.263 for DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (1.1× as much) and $0.925 for Qwen3.8 27B (3.9× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 155.0 (#29 of 148), GLM-5.3-Flash 151.9 (#42 of 148) and Qwen3.8 27B 149.4 (#53 of 148). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (148.8–157.6 vs 149.4–154.3), so treat the gap as small.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for DeepSeek V4.1 Flash, GLM-5.3-Flash and Qwen3.8 27B yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. All three support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash and GLM-5.3-Flash have the largest context windows (1,000,000 and 1,000,000 tokens), against 262,144 for Qwen3.8 27B. Maximum output per response: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash up to 384,000, GLM-5.3-Flash up to 131,072, Qwen3.8 27B up to 32,768 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash accepts text and images; GLM-5.3-Flash accepts text, images, PDFs and video; Qwen3.8 27B accepts text, images and video. GLM-5.3-Flash handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Yes, all three publish their weights (MIT), so you can self-host them.

Which is newer?

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is the newest, released Sep 10, 2026. GLM-5.3-Flash came out Aug 26, 2026; Qwen3.8 27B came out Aug 14, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash May 2025.

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 Oct 4, 2026.