ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Gemini 3.5 Flash vs GLM-5 vs Qwen3.6 27B

Gemini 3.5 Flash comes out ahead, 69 to 65 and 55 on our weighted score, though Qwen3.6 27B is 2.5× cheaper per token.

  1. Our pick

    Google

    Gemini 3.5 Flash

    Released May 19, 2026

    69/100
    • ECI154.5
    • Price$1.50 / $9.00
    • Context1.05M
    Full specs Remove Gemini 3.5 Flash

  2. Z.ai (Zhipu)

    GLM-5

    Released Feb 12, 2026

    55/100
    • ECI145.8
    • Price$1.00 / $3.20
    • Context205K
    Full specs Remove GLM-5

  3. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3.6 27B

    Released Apr 22, 2026

    65/100
    • ECI146.5
    • Price$0.60 / $3.60
    • Context262K
    Full specs Remove Qwen3.6 27B
01 — Verdict

Gemini 3.5 Flash is our pick

Gemini 3.5 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 69/100 against Qwen3.6 27B (65) and GLM-5 (55). It leads on capability, inputs & features and context window. Qwen3.6 27B wins on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityGemini 3.5 FlashCapabilities Index (ECI): Gemini 3.5 Flash 154.5 · Qwen3.6 27B 146.5 · GLM-5 145.8
  • Lowest priceQwen3.6 27BQwen3.6 27B $1.35 · GLM-5 $1.55 · Gemini 3.5 Flash $3.38 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextGemini 3.5 FlashGemini 3.5 Flash 1,048,576 · Qwen3.6 27B 262,144 · GLM-5 204,800 tokens
  • Widest inputsGemini 3.5 FlashGemini 3.5 Flash: Text, Images, PDFs, Audio, Video · GLM-5: Text · Qwen3.6 27B: Text, Images, Audio, Video
  • Self-hostingGLM-5 and Qwen3.6 27BPublishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightGemini 3.5 FlashGLM-5Qwen3.6 27B
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%847374
Price25%254144
Inputs & features15%1003590
Context window10%613237
Overall100%69/10055/10065/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

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

Gemini 3.5 Flash vs GLM-5 vs Qwen3.6 27B specifications side by side
SpecificationGemini 3.5 FlashGoogleGLM-5Z.ai (Zhipu)Qwen3.6 27BAlibaba (Qwen)
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)154.5 (best)145.8146.5
ECI rank#33 of 148 (best)#74 of 148#68 of 148
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions92.8% (best)87.8%85.9%
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics62.8% (best)—35.1%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics95.6% (best)80.0%91.1%
SWE-bench VerifiedFixing real GitHub issues79.3% (best)72.1%—
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions66.2%——
Price per million tokens
Input$1.50$1.00$0.60 (best)
Output$9.00$3.20 (best)$3.60
Cached input$0.15 (best)$0.20—
Blended (3:1)$3.38$1.55$1.35 (best)
Long-context rateSame rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceOfficial Google APIOfficial Z.AI APIOfficial Alibaba API
Limits
Context window1,048,576 tokens (best)204,800 tokens262,144 tokens
Max output65,536 tokens131,072 tokens (best)65,536 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesYesNoYes
PDFsYesNoNo
AudioYesNoYes
VideoYesNoYes
ReasoningYesminimal · low · medium · highYesYes
Tool callingYesYesYes
Structured outputYesNoYes
Availability
WeightsProprietaryOpenOpen
API model IDgemini-3.5-flashglm-5qwen3.6-27b
API providers32 (best)2727
ReleasedMay 19, 2026Feb 12, 2026Apr 22, 2026
Knowledge cutoffJan 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.

  • Gemini 3.5 Flash$33.00
  • GLM-5$16.40
  • Qwen3.6 27B$13.20
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Gemini 3.5 Flash, GLM-5 or Qwen3.6 27B?

Gemini 3.5 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 69/100 against Qwen3.6 27B (65) and GLM-5 (55). It leads on capability, inputs & features and context window. Qwen3.6 27B wins on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, Gemini 3.5 Flash, GLM-5 or Qwen3.6 27B?

Qwen3.6 27B is cheaper at $0.60 input / $3.60 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). GLM-5 costs $1.00 input / $3.20 output per million tokens (official Z.AI API price); Gemini 3.5 Flash costs $1.50 input / $9.00 output per million tokens (official Google API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $1.35 per million tokens for Qwen3.6 27B versus $1.55 for GLM-5 (1.1× as much) and $3.38 for Gemini 3.5 Flash (2.5× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

Gemini 3.5 Flash scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Gemini 3.5 Flash 154.5 (#33 of 148), Qwen3.6 27B 146.5 (#68 of 148) and GLM-5 145.8 (#74 of 148). Their confidence ranges do not overlap (152.5–156.6 vs 144.2–147.9), so the gap is a real one. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — Gemini 3.5 Flash 92.8%, GLM-5 87.8%, Qwen3.6 27B 85.9%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — Gemini 3.5 Flash 95.6%, Qwen3.6 27B 91.1%, GLM-5 80.0%.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Qwen3.6 27B yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Gemini 3.5 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?

Gemini 3.5 Flash has the largest context window at 1,048,576 tokens, against 262,144 for Qwen3.6 27B and 204,800 for GLM-5. Maximum output per response: Gemini 3.5 Flash up to 65,536, GLM-5 up to 131,072, Qwen3.6 27B up to 65,536 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Gemini 3.5 Flash accepts text, images, PDFs, audio and video; GLM-5 accepts text; Qwen3.6 27B accepts text, images, audio and video. Gemini 3.5 Flash handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

GLM-5 and Qwen3.6 27B publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Gemini 3.5 Flash is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Gemini 3.5 Flash is the newest, released May 19, 2026. Qwen3.6 27B came out Apr 22, 2026; GLM-5 came out Feb 12, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: Gemini 3.5 Flash Jan 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.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons