GLM-4.6V-Flash vs Ministral 14B vs Ministral 3 14B
Too close to call on our weighted score (GLM-4.6V-Flash 65, Ministral 14B 64, Ministral 3 14B 63). The right pick depends on what you value most.
Z.ai (Zhipu)GLM-4.6V-Flash
65/100- ECI—
- Price$0.161 / $0.559
- Context128K
Mistral AIMinistral 14B
64/100- ECI—
- Price$0.20 / $0.20
- Context262K
- Mistral AI
Ministral 3 14B
63/100- ECI—
- Price$0.268 / $0.325
- Context262K
Too close to call
It is close. Our weighted score puts them within a point (GLM-4.6V-Flash 65/100, Ministral 14B 64/100, Ministral 3 14B 63/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Ministral 14B on price. 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 priceMinistral 14BMinistral 14B $0.20 · GLM-4.6V-Flash $0.261 · Ministral 3 14B $0.282 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextMinistral 14B and Ministral 3 14BMinistral 14B 262,144 · Ministral 3 14B 262,144 · GLM-4.6V-Flash 128,000 tokens
- Widest inputsGLM-4.6V-FlashGLM-4.6V-Flash: Text, Images, Video · Ministral 14B: Text, Images · Ministral 3 14B: Text, Images
- Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
| Measure | Weight | GLM-4.6V-Flash | Ministral 14B | Ministral 3 14B |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 78 | 83 | 76 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 70 | 50 | 60 |
| Context window | 20% | 24 | 37 | 37 |
| Overall | 100% | 65/100 | 64/100 | 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) | Ministral 14BMistral AI | Ministral 3 14BMistral AI |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $0.161 (best) | $0.20 | $0.268 |
| Output | $0.559 | $0.20 (best) | $0.325 |
| Cached input | — | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.261 | $0.20 (best) | $0.282 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Median of 2 providers | Median of 1 providers | Median of 2 providers |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 128,000 tokens | 262,144 tokens (best) | 262,144 tokens (best) |
| Max output | 32,768 tokens | 262,144 tokens (best) | 262,144 tokens (best) |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| PDFs | No | No | No |
| Audio | No | No | No |
| Video | Yes | No | No |
| Reasoning | Yes | No | No |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | No | Yes |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Open | OpenApache-2.0 | OpenApache 2.0 |
| API model ID | glm-4.6v-flash | — | — |
| API providers | 6 (best) | 1 | 2 |
| Released | Dec 8, 2025 | Dec 2, 2025 | Dec 2, 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
- Ministral 14B$2.40
- Ministral 3 14B$3.33
Which should you choose?
Which is better: GLM-4.6V-Flash, Ministral 14B or Ministral 3 14B?
It is close. Our weighted score puts them within a point (GLM-4.6V-Flash 65/100, Ministral 14B 64/100, Ministral 3 14B 63/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Ministral 14B on price. 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, Ministral 14B or Ministral 3 14B?
Ministral 14B is cheaper at $0.20 input / $0.20 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider). GLM-4.6V-Flash costs $0.161 input / $0.559 output per million tokens (median across 2 API providers; free on Z.AI); Ministral 3 14B costs $0.268 input / $0.325 output per million tokens (median across 2 API providers). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.20 per million tokens for Ministral 14B versus $0.261 for GLM-4.6V-Flash (1.3× as much) and $0.282 for Ministral 3 14B (1.4× 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, Ministral 14B has not been scored yet and Ministral 3 14B has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for GLM-4.6V-Flash, Ministral 14B and Ministral 3 14B 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?
Ministral 14B and Ministral 3 14B have the largest context windows (262,144 and 262,144 tokens), against 128,000 for GLM-4.6V-Flash. Maximum output per response: GLM-4.6V-Flash up to 32,768, Ministral 14B up to 262,144, Ministral 3 14B up to 262,144 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
GLM-4.6V-Flash accepts text, images and video; Ministral 14B accepts text and images; Ministral 3 14B accepts text and images. GLM-4.6V-Flash handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
Yes, all three publish their weights (Apache-2.0 and Apache 2.0), so you can self-host them.
Which is newer?
GLM-4.6V-Flash is the newest, released Dec 8, 2025. Ministral 14B came out Dec 2, 2025; Ministral 3 14B came out Dec 2, 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.
