GLM-4.5V vs QwQ Plus vs Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct
GLM-4.5V comes out ahead, 49 to 39 and 38 on our weighted score.
- Our pick
Z.ai (Zhipu)GLM-4.5V
49/100- ECI—
- Price$0.60 / $1.80
- Context64K
Alibaba (Qwen)QwQ Plus
38/100- ECI—
- Price$0.80 / $2.40
- Context131K
- Alibaba (Qwen)
Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct
39/100- ECI—
- Price$0.50 / $2.00
- Context131K
GLM-4.5V is our pick
GLM-4.5V is the better all-round choice, scoring 49/100 against Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct (39) and QwQ Plus (38). 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 priceQwen3-Next 80B-A3B InstructQwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct $0.875 · GLM-4.5V $0.90 · QwQ Plus $1.20 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextQwQ Plus and Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B InstructQwQ Plus 131,072 · Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct 131,072 · GLM-4.5V 64,000 tokens
- Widest inputsGLM-4.5VGLM-4.5V: Text, Images, Video · QwQ Plus: Text · Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct: Text
- Self-hostingGLM-4.5V and Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B InstructPublishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | GLM-4.5V | QwQ Plus | Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 52 | 46 | 53 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 70 | 35 | 25 |
| Context window | 20% | 12 | 24 | 24 |
| Overall | 100% | 49/100 | 38/100 | 39/100 |
Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | GLM-4.5VZ.ai (Zhipu) | QwQ PlusAlibaba (Qwen) | Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B InstructAlibaba (Qwen) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — | — |
| GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions | — | 65.4% | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $0.60 | $0.80 | $0.50 (best) |
| Output | $1.80 (best) | $2.40 | $2.00 |
| Cached input | — | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.90 | $1.20 | $0.875 (best) |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Z.AI API | Official Alibaba API | Official Alibaba API |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 64,000 tokens | 131,072 tokens (best) | 131,072 tokens (best) |
| Max output | 16,384 tokens | 8,192 tokens | 32,768 tokens (best) |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | No | No |
| PDFs | No | No | No |
| Audio | No | No | No |
| Video | Yes | No | No |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yes | No |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | No | No |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Open | Proprietary | Open |
| API model ID | glm-4.5v | qwq-plus | qwen3-next-80b-a3b-instruct |
| API providers | 11 | 2 | 13 (best) |
| Released | Aug 11, 2025 | Mar 5, 2025 | Sep 2025 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Apr 2025 | Apr 2024 | Apr 2025 |
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
- QwQ Plus$12.80
- Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct$9.00
Which should you choose?
Which is better: GLM-4.5V, QwQ Plus or Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct?
GLM-4.5V is the better all-round choice, scoring 49/100 against Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct (39) and QwQ Plus (38). 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-4.5V, QwQ Plus or Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct?
Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct is cheaper at $0.50 input / $2.00 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). GLM-4.5V costs $0.60 input / $1.80 output per million tokens (official Z.AI API price); QwQ Plus costs $0.80 input / $2.40 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.875 per million tokens for Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct versus $0.90 for GLM-4.5V (1× as much) and $1.20 for QwQ Plus (1.4× 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, QwQ Plus has not been scored yet and Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for GLM-4.5V, QwQ Plus and Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct 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?
QwQ Plus and Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct have the largest context windows (131,072 and 131,072 tokens), against 64,000 for GLM-4.5V. Maximum output per response: GLM-4.5V up to 16,384, QwQ Plus up to 8,192, Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct up to 32,768 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
GLM-4.5V accepts text, images and video; QwQ Plus accepts text; Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct accepts text. GLM-4.5V handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
GLM-4.5V and Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; QwQ Plus is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct is the newest, released Sep 2025. GLM-4.5V came out Aug 11, 2025; QwQ Plus came out Mar 5, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: GLM-4.5V Apr 2025, QwQ Plus Apr 2024, Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct 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 Oct 4, 2026.
