ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Nov 2, 2026

GLM-4.5V vs Morph V3 Fast vs Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking

GLM-4.5V comes out ahead, 48 to 44 and 32 on our weighted score.

  1. Our pick

    Z.ai (Zhipu)

    GLM-4.5V

    Released Aug 11, 2025

    48/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.60 / $1.80
    • Context64K
  2. Morph

    Morph V3 Fast

    Released Jul 7, 2025

    32/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.80 / $1.20
    • Context262K
  3. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking

    Released Sep 23, 2025

    44/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.50 / $3.95
    • Context131K
01 — Verdict

GLM-4.5V is our pick

GLM-4.5V is the better all-round choice, scoring 48/100 against Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking (44) and Morph V3 Fast (32). It leads on inputs & features. Morph V3 Fast wins on 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-4.5V and Morph V3 FastGLM-4.5V $0.90 · Morph V3 Fast $0.90 · Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking $1.36 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextMorph V3 FastMorph V3 Fast 262,144 · Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking 131,072 · GLM-4.5V 64,000 tokens
  • Widest inputsGLM-4.5VGLM-4.5V: Text, Images, Video · Morph V3 Fast: Text · Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking: Text, Images
  • Self-hostingGLM-4.5V and Qwen3 VL 235B A22B ThinkingPublishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightGLM-4.5VMorph V3 FastQwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking
Price50%505042
Inputs & features30%70060
Context window20%123725
Overall100%48/10032/10044/100

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-4.5V vs Morph V3 Fast vs Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking specifications side by side
SpecificationGLM-4.5VZ.ai (Zhipu)Morph V3 FastMorphQwen3 VL 235B A22B ThinkingAlibaba (Qwen)
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)———
ECI rank———
Price per million tokens
Input$0.60$0.80$0.50 (best)
Output$1.80$1.20 (best)$3.95
Cached input$0.11——
Blended (3:1)$0.90 (best)$0.90 (best)$1.36
Long-context rateSame rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceOfficial Z.AI APIMedian of 5 providersMedian of 5 providers
Limits
Context window64,000 tokens262,144 tokens (best)131,072 tokens
Max output16,384 tokens131,072 tokens (best)32,768 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesYesNoYes
PDFsNoNoNo
AudioNoNoNo
VideoYesNoNo
ReasoningYesNoYes
Tool callingYesNoYes
Structured outputNoNoNo
Availability
WeightsOpenProprietaryOpen
API model IDglm-4.5v——
API providers17 (best)55
ReleasedAug 11, 2025Jul 7, 2025Sep 23, 2025
Knowledge cutoffApr 2025—Mar 31, 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-4.5V$9.60
  • Morph V3 Fast$10.40
  • Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking$12.90
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: GLM-4.5V, Morph V3 Fast or Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking?

GLM-4.5V is the better all-round choice, scoring 48/100 against Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking (44) and Morph V3 Fast (32). It leads on inputs & features. Morph V3 Fast wins on 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, GLM-4.5V, Morph V3 Fast or Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking?

GLM-4.5V is cheaper at $0.60 input / $1.80 output per million tokens (official Z.AI API price). Morph V3 Fast costs $0.80 input / $1.20 output per million tokens (median across 5 API providers); Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking costs $0.50 input / $3.95 output per million tokens (median across 5 API providers). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.90 per million tokens for GLM-4.5V versus $0.90 for Morph V3 Fast (1× as much) and $1.36 for Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking (1.5× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. GLM-4.5V has not been scored yet, Morph V3 Fast has not been scored yet and Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking has not been scored yet.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for GLM-4.5V, Morph V3 Fast and Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Note that Morph V3 Fast does not support tool calling, which most coding agents need.

Which has the bigger context window?

Morph V3 Fast has the largest context window at 262,144 tokens, against 131,072 for Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking and 64,000 for GLM-4.5V. Maximum output per response: GLM-4.5V up to 16,384, Morph V3 Fast up to 131,072, Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking up to 32,768 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

GLM-4.5V accepts text, images and video; Morph V3 Fast accepts text; Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking accepts text and images. GLM-4.5V handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

GLM-4.5V and Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Morph V3 Fast is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking is the newest, released Sep 23, 2025. GLM-4.5V came out Aug 11, 2025; Morph V3 Fast came out Jul 7, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: GLM-4.5V Apr 2025, Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking Mar 31, 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.