GLM-4.6V-Flash vs Grok 4.1 Fast vs Nemotron Nano 12B v2 VL
Grok 4.1 Fast comes out ahead, 71 to 65 and 63 on our weighted score, though GLM-4.6V-Flash is 5% cheaper per token.
Z.ai (Zhipu)GLM-4.6V-Flash
65/100- ECI—
- Price$0.161 / $0.559
- Context128K
- Our pick
xAIGrok 4.1 Fast
71/100- ECI—
- Price$0.20 / $0.50
- Context2M
NVIDIANemotron Nano 12B v2 VL
63/100- ECI—
- Price$0.20 / $0.60
- Context128K
Grok 4.1 Fast is our pick
Grok 4.1 Fast is the better all-round choice, scoring 71/100 against GLM-4.6V-Flash (65) and Nemotron Nano 12B v2 VL (63). It leads 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-4.6V-FlashGLM-4.6V-Flash $0.261 · Grok 4.1 Fast $0.275 · Nemotron Nano 12B v2 VL $0.30 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextGrok 4.1 FastGrok 4.1 Fast 2,000,000 · GLM-4.6V-Flash 128,000 · Nemotron Nano 12B v2 VL 128,000 tokens
- Widest inputsGLM-4.6V-Flash and Nemotron Nano 12B v2 VLGLM-4.6V-Flash: Text, Images, Video · Grok 4.1 Fast: Text, Images · Nemotron Nano 12B v2 VL: Text, Images, Video
- Self-hostingGLM-4.6V-Flash and Nemotron Nano 12B v2 VLPublishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | GLM-4.6V-Flash | Grok 4.1 Fast | Nemotron Nano 12B v2 VL |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 78 | 76 | 75 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 70 | 60 | 70 |
| Context window | 20% | 24 | 72 | 24 |
| Overall | 100% | 65/100 | 71/100 | 63/100 |
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-4.6V-FlashZ.ai (Zhipu) | Grok 4.1 FastxAI | Nemotron Nano 12B v2 VLNVIDIA |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $0.161 (best) | $0.20 | $0.20 |
| Output | $0.559 | $0.50 (best) | $0.60 |
| Cached input | — | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.261 (best) | $0.275 | $0.30 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Median of 2 providers | Median of 2 providers | Median of 3 providers |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 128,000 tokens | 2,000,000 tokens (best) | 128,000 tokens |
| Max output | 32,768 tokens | 30,000 tokens | 128,000 tokens (best) |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| PDFs | No | No | No |
| Audio | No | No | No |
| Video | Yes | No | Yes |
| Reasoning | Yes | No | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | Yes | No |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Open | Proprietary | Open |
| API model ID | glm-4.6v-flash | — | nvidia/nemotron-nano-12b-v2-vl |
| API providers | 6 (best) | 2 | 4 |
| Released | Dec 8, 2025 | Nov 19, 2025 | Oct 28, 2025 |
| Knowledge cutoff | — | — | — |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- GLM-4.6V-Flash$2.73
- Grok 4.1 Fast$3.00
- Nemotron Nano 12B v2 VL$3.20
Which should you choose?
Which is better: GLM-4.6V-Flash, Grok 4.1 Fast or Nemotron Nano 12B v2 VL?
Grok 4.1 Fast is the better all-round choice, scoring 71/100 against GLM-4.6V-Flash (65) and Nemotron Nano 12B v2 VL (63). It leads 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-4.6V-Flash, Grok 4.1 Fast or Nemotron Nano 12B v2 VL?
GLM-4.6V-Flash is cheaper at $0.161 input / $0.559 output per million tokens (median across 2 API providers; free on Z.AI). Grok 4.1 Fast costs $0.20 input / $0.50 output per million tokens (median across 2 API providers); Nemotron Nano 12B v2 VL costs $0.20 input / $0.60 output per million tokens (median across 3 API providers; free on Nvidia). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.261 per million tokens for GLM-4.6V-Flash versus $0.275 for Grok 4.1 Fast (1.1× as much) and $0.30 for Nemotron Nano 12B v2 VL (1.2× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. GLM-4.6V-Flash has not been scored yet, Grok 4.1 Fast has not been scored yet and Nemotron Nano 12B v2 VL has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for GLM-4.6V-Flash, Grok 4.1 Fast and Nemotron Nano 12B v2 VL 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?
Grok 4.1 Fast has the largest context window at 2,000,000 tokens, against 128,000 for GLM-4.6V-Flash and 128,000 for Nemotron Nano 12B v2 VL. Maximum output per response: GLM-4.6V-Flash up to 32,768, Grok 4.1 Fast up to 30,000, Nemotron Nano 12B v2 VL up to 128,000 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
GLM-4.6V-Flash accepts text, images and video; Grok 4.1 Fast accepts text and images; Nemotron Nano 12B v2 VL accepts text, images and video. GLM-4.6V-Flash handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
GLM-4.6V-Flash and Nemotron Nano 12B v2 VL publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Grok 4.1 Fast is proprietary.
Which is newer?
GLM-4.6V-Flash is the newest, released Dec 8, 2025. Grok 4.1 Fast came out Nov 19, 2025; Nemotron Nano 12B v2 VL came out Oct 28, 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.
