ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Nov 2, 2026

GLM-4.5-Air vs Qwen3 Omni 30B A3B Thinking vs Codestral 25.08

Qwen3 Omni 30B A3B Thinking comes out ahead, 59 to 48 and 47 on our weighted score.

  1. Z.ai (Zhipu)

    GLM-4.5-Air

    Released Jul 28, 2025

    48/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.20 / $1.10
    • Context131K
  2. Our pick

    Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3 Omni 30B A3B Thinking

    Released Sep 22, 2025

    59/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.25 / $0.97
    • Context66K
  3. Mistral AI

    Codestral 25.08

    Released Jul 30, 2025

    47/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.30 / $0.90
    • Context128K
01 — Verdict

Qwen3 Omni 30B A3B Thinking is our pick

Qwen3 Omni 30B A3B Thinking is the better all-round choice, scoring 59/100 against GLM-4.5-Air (48) and Codestral 25.08 (47). It leads on inputs & features. 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 · Qwen3 Omni 30B A3B Thinking $0.43 · Codestral 25.08 $0.45 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextGLM-4.5-AirGLM-4.5-Air 131,072 · Codestral 25.08 128,000 · Qwen3 Omni 30B A3B Thinking 65,536 tokens
  • Widest inputsQwen3 Omni 30B A3B ThinkingGLM-4.5-Air: Text · Qwen3 Omni 30B A3B Thinking: Text, Images, Audio, Video · Codestral 25.08: Text
  • Self-hostingGLM-4.5-Air and Qwen3 Omni 30B A3B ThinkingPublishes downloadable weights (Apache-2.0)
How the score is built
MeasureWeightGLM-4.5-AirQwen3 Omni 30B A3B ThinkingCodestral 25.08
Price50%656464
Inputs & features30%358035
Context window20%251224
Overall100%48/10059/10047/100

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.

GLM-4.5-Air vs Qwen3 Omni 30B A3B Thinking vs Codestral 25.08 specifications side by side
SpecificationGLM-4.5-AirZ.ai (Zhipu)Qwen3 Omni 30B A3B ThinkingAlibaba (Qwen)Codestral 25.08Mistral AI
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)———
ECI rank———
Price per million tokens
Input$0.20 (best)$0.25$0.30
Output$1.10$0.97$0.90 (best)
Cached input$0.03—$0.03
Blended (3:1)$0.425 (best)$0.43$0.45
Long-context rateSame rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceOfficial Z.AI APIMedian of 1 providersOfficial Mistral API
Limits
Context window131,072 tokens (best)65,536 tokens128,000 tokens
Max output98,304 tokens (best)16,384 tokens8,192 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesNoYesNo
PDFsNoNoNo
AudioNoYesNo
VideoNoYesNo
ReasoningYesYesNo
Tool callingYesYesYes
Structured outputNoNoYes
Availability
WeightsOpenOpenApache-2.0Proprietary
API model IDglm-4.5-air—codestral-2508
API providers19 (best)111
ReleasedJul 28, 2025Sep 22, 2025Jul 30, 2025
Knowledge cutoffApr 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.

  • GLM-4.5-Air$4.20
  • Qwen3 Omni 30B A3B Thinking$4.44
  • Codestral 25.08$4.80
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: GLM-4.5-Air, Qwen3 Omni 30B A3B Thinking or Codestral 25.08?

Qwen3 Omni 30B A3B Thinking is the better all-round choice, scoring 59/100 against GLM-4.5-Air (48) and Codestral 25.08 (47). It leads on inputs & features. 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, GLM-4.5-Air, Qwen3 Omni 30B A3B Thinking or Codestral 25.08?

GLM-4.5-Air is cheaper at $0.20 input / $1.10 output per million tokens (official Z.AI API price). Qwen3 Omni 30B A3B Thinking costs $0.25 input / $0.97 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider); Codestral 25.08 costs $0.30 input / $0.90 output per million tokens (official Mistral 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 $0.43 for Qwen3 Omni 30B A3B Thinking (1× as much) and $0.45 for Codestral 25.08 (1.1× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. GLM-4.5-Air has not been scored yet, Qwen3 Omni 30B A3B Thinking has not been scored yet and Codestral 25.08 has not been scored yet.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for GLM-4.5-Air, Qwen3 Omni 30B A3B Thinking and Codestral 25.08 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?

GLM-4.5-Air has the largest context window at 131,072 tokens, against 128,000 for Codestral 25.08 and 65,536 for Qwen3 Omni 30B A3B Thinking. Maximum output per response: GLM-4.5-Air up to 98,304, Qwen3 Omni 30B A3B Thinking up to 16,384, Codestral 25.08 up to 8,192 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

GLM-4.5-Air accepts text; Qwen3 Omni 30B A3B Thinking accepts text, images, audio and video; Codestral 25.08 accepts text. Qwen3 Omni 30B A3B Thinking handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

GLM-4.5-Air and Qwen3 Omni 30B A3B Thinking publishes its weights (Apache-2.0) and can be self-hosted; Codestral 25.08 is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Qwen3 Omni 30B A3B Thinking is the newest, released Sep 22, 2025. Codestral 25.08 came out Jul 30, 2025; GLM-4.5-Air came out Jul 28, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: GLM-4.5-Air Apr 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 Nov 2, 2026.