ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Nov 2, 2026

GLM-4.6V-Flash vs Sarvam 105B

GLM-4.6V-Flash comes out ahead, 63 to 52 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. Our pick

    Z.ai (Zhipu)

    GLM-4.6V-Flash

    Released Dec 8, 2025

    63/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.161 / $0.559
    • Context128K
    Full specs Remove GLM-4.6V-Flash

  2. Sarvam AI

    Sarvam 105B

    Released Feb 18, 2026

    52/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.158 / $0.632
    • Context131K
    Full specs Remove Sarvam 105B

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

GLM-4.6V-Flash is our pick

GLM-4.6V-Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 63/100 against Sarvam 105B (52). 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 priceGLM-4.6V-FlashGLM-4.6V-Flash $0.261 · Sarvam 105B $0.276 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextSarvam 105BSarvam 105B 131,072 · GLM-4.6V-Flash 128,000 tokens
  • Widest inputsGLM-4.6V-FlashGLM-4.6V-Flash: Text, Images, Video · Sarvam 105B: Text
  • Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
How the score is built
MeasureWeightGLM-4.6V-FlashSarvam 105B
Price50%7473
Inputs & features30%7035
Context window20%2425
Overall100%63/10052/100

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-4.6V-Flash vs Sarvam 105B specifications side by side
SpecificationGLM-4.6V-FlashZ.ai (Zhipu)Sarvam 105BSarvam AI
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)——
ECI rank——
Price per million tokens
Input$0.161$0.158 (best)
Output$0.559 (best)$0.632
Cached input—$0.053
Blended (3:1)$0.261 (best)$0.276
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceMedian of 2 providersOfficial Sarvam AI API
Limits
Context window128,000 tokens131,072 tokens (best)
Max output32,768 tokens131,072 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesYesNo
PDFsNoNo
AudioNoNo
VideoYesNo
ReasoningYesYeslow · medium · high
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputNoNo
Availability
WeightsOpenOpen
API model IDglm-4.6v-flashsarvam-105b
API providers6 (best)3
ReleasedDec 8, 2025Feb 18, 2026
Knowledge cutoff——
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-4.6V-Flash$2.73
  • Sarvam 105B$2.84
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: GLM-4.6V-Flash or Sarvam 105B?

GLM-4.6V-Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 63/100 against Sarvam 105B (52). 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-4.6V-Flash or Sarvam 105B?

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). Sarvam 105B costs $0.158 input / $0.632 output per million tokens (official Sarvam AI API price). 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 $0.276 for Sarvam 105B (1.1× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. GLM-4.6V-Flash has not been scored yet and Sarvam 105B has not been scored yet.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for GLM-4.6V-Flash and Sarvam 105B yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Sarvam 105B has the largest context window at 131,072 tokens, against 128,000 for GLM-4.6V-Flash. Maximum output per response: GLM-4.6V-Flash up to 32,768, Sarvam 105B up to 131,072 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

GLM-4.6V-Flash accepts text, images and video; Sarvam 105B accepts text. GLM-4.6V-Flash handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Yes, both publish their weights, so you can self-host them.

Which is newer?

Sarvam 105B is the newest, released Feb 18, 2026. GLM-4.6V-Flash came out Dec 8, 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.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons