ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

GLM-4.5-Flash vs Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B vs Qwen Flash

Too close to call on our weighted score (Qwen Flash 68, GLM-4.5-Flash 65, Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B 65). The right pick depends on what you value most.

  1. Z.ai (Zhipu)

    GLM-4.5-Flash

    Released Jul 28, 2025

    65/100
    • ECI—
    • PriceFree / Free
    • Context131K
  2. NVIDIA

    Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B

    Released Apr 7, 2025

    65/100
    • ECI—
    • PriceFree / Free
    • Context128K
  3. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen Flash

    Released Jul 28, 2025

    68/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.05 / $0.40
    • Context1M
01 — Verdict

Too close to call

It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 2 points (Qwen Flash 68/100, GLM-4.5-Flash 65/100, Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B 65/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: GLM-4.5-Flash on price and Qwen Flash for long inputs. 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-Flash and Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253BGLM-4.5-Flash Free · Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B Free · Qwen Flash $0.138 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextQwen FlashQwen Flash 1,000,000 · GLM-4.5-Flash 131,072 · Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B 128,000 tokens
  • Widest inputsSame inputsGLM-4.5-Flash: Text · Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B: Text · Qwen Flash: Text
  • Self-hostingLlama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253BPublishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightGLM-4.5-FlashLlama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253BQwen Flash
Price50%10010091
Inputs & features30%353535
Context window20%242460
Overall100%65/10065/10068/100

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-Flash vs Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B vs Qwen Flash specifications side by side
SpecificationGLM-4.5-FlashZ.ai (Zhipu)Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253BNVIDIAQwen FlashAlibaba (Qwen)
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)———
ECI rank———
Price per million tokens
InputFree (best)Free (best)$0.05
OutputFree (best)Free (best)$0.40
Cached input———
Blended (3:1)Free (best)Free (best)$0.138
Long-context rateSame rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceOfficial Z.AI APIOfficial Nvidia APIOfficial Alibaba API
Limits
Context window131,072 tokens128,000 tokens1,000,000 tokens (best)
Max output98,304 tokens (best)8,192 tokens32,768 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesNoNoNo
PDFsNoNoNo
AudioNoNoNo
VideoNoNoNo
ReasoningYesYesYes
Tool callingYesYesYes
Structured outputNoNoNo
Availability
WeightsProprietaryOpenProprietary
API model IDglm-4.5-flashnvidia/llama-3.1-nemotron-ultra-253b-v1qwen-flash
API providers416 (best)
ReleasedJul 28, 2025Apr 7, 2025Jul 28, 2025
Knowledge cutoffApr 2025—Apr 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.

  • GLM-4.5-FlashFree
  • Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253BFree
  • Qwen Flash$1.30
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: GLM-4.5-Flash, Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B or Qwen Flash?

It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 2 points (Qwen Flash 68/100, GLM-4.5-Flash 65/100, Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B 65/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: GLM-4.5-Flash on price and Qwen Flash for long inputs. 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-Flash, Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B or Qwen Flash?

GLM-4.5-Flash is cheaper at Free input / Free output per million tokens (official Z.AI API price). Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B costs Free input / Free output per million tokens (official Nvidia API price); Qwen Flash costs $0.05 input / $0.40 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). GLM-4.5-Flash is listed as free.

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. GLM-4.5-Flash has not been scored yet, Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B has not been scored yet and Qwen Flash has not been scored yet.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for GLM-4.5-Flash, Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B and Qwen Flash 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 Flash has the largest context window at 1,000,000 tokens, against 131,072 for GLM-4.5-Flash and 128,000 for Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B. Maximum output per response: GLM-4.5-Flash up to 98,304, Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B up to 8,192, Qwen Flash up to 32,768 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

GLM-4.5-Flash accepts text; Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B accepts text; Qwen Flash accepts text. They handle the same number of input types.

Are any of these open source?

Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; GLM-4.5-Flash and Qwen Flash is proprietary.

Which is newer?

GLM-4.5-Flash is the newest, released Jul 28, 2025. Qwen Flash came out Jul 28, 2025; Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B came out Apr 7, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: GLM-4.5-Flash Apr 2025, Qwen Flash 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 Oct 4, 2026.