ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

GLM-4.7-FlashX vs GLM-5.3-Flash vs Step 3.5 Flash

GLM-5.3-Flash comes out ahead, 79 to 62 and 61 on our weighted score, though Step 3.5 Flash is 37% cheaper per token.

  1. Z.ai (Zhipu)

    GLM-4.7-FlashX

    Released Jan 19, 2026

    61/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.07 / $0.40
    • Context200K
  2. Our pick

    Z.ai (Zhipu)

    GLM-5.3-Flash

    Released Aug 26, 2026

    79/100
    • ECI151.9
    • Price$0.15 / $0.50
    • Context1M
  3. StepFun

    Step 3.5 Flash

    Released Jan 29, 2026

    62/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.10 / $0.30
    • Context256K
01 — Verdict

GLM-5.3-Flash is our pick

GLM-5.3-Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 79/100 against Step 3.5 Flash (62) and GLM-4.7-FlashX (61). It leads on inputs & features and 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 priceStep 3.5 FlashStep 3.5 Flash $0.15 · GLM-4.7-FlashX $0.152 · GLM-5.3-Flash $0.237 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextGLM-5.3-FlashGLM-5.3-Flash 1,000,000 · Step 3.5 Flash 256,000 · GLM-4.7-FlashX 200,000 tokens
  • Widest inputsGLM-5.3-FlashGLM-4.7-FlashX: Text · GLM-5.3-Flash: Text, Images, PDFs, Video · Step 3.5 Flash: Text
  • Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
How the score is built
MeasureWeightGLM-4.7-FlashXGLM-5.3-FlashStep 3.5 Flash
Price50%897989
Inputs & features30%359035
Context window20%326036
Overall100%61/10079/10062/100

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-4.7-FlashX vs GLM-5.3-Flash vs Step 3.5 Flash specifications side by side
SpecificationGLM-4.7-FlashXZ.ai (Zhipu)GLM-5.3-FlashZ.ai (Zhipu)Step 3.5 FlashStepFun
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)—151.9—
ECI rank—#42 of 148—
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions—90.2%—
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics—55.8%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics—93.9%—
Price per million tokens
Input$0.07 (best)$0.15$0.10
Output$0.40$0.50$0.30 (best)
Cached input$0.01 (best)$0.03$0.02
Blended (3:1)$0.152$0.237$0.15 (best)
Long-context rateSame rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceOfficial Z.AI APIOfficial Z.AI APIOfficial StepFun (Global) API
Limits
Context window200,000 tokens1,000,000 tokens (best)256,000 tokens
Max output131,072 tokens131,072 tokens256,000 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesNoYesNo
PDFsNoYesNo
AudioNoNoNo
VideoNoYesNo
ReasoningYesYeslow · high · maxYeslow · high
Tool callingYesYesYes
Structured outputNoYesNo
Availability
WeightsOpenOpenOpen
API model IDglm-4.7-flashxglm-5.3-flashstep-3.5-flash
API providers865 (best)8
ReleasedJan 19, 2026Aug 26, 2026Jan 29, 2026
Knowledge cutoffApr 2025—Jan 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-4.7-FlashX$1.50
  • GLM-5.3-Flash$2.50
  • Step 3.5 Flash$1.60
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: GLM-4.7-FlashX, GLM-5.3-Flash or Step 3.5 Flash?

GLM-5.3-Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 79/100 against Step 3.5 Flash (62) and GLM-4.7-FlashX (61). It leads on inputs & features and 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-4.7-FlashX, GLM-5.3-Flash or Step 3.5 Flash?

Step 3.5 Flash is cheaper at $0.10 input / $0.30 output per million tokens (official StepFun (Global) API price). GLM-4.7-FlashX costs $0.07 input / $0.40 output per million tokens (official Z.AI API price); GLM-5.3-Flash costs $0.15 input / $0.50 output per million tokens (official Z.AI API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.15 per million tokens for Step 3.5 Flash versus $0.152 for GLM-4.7-FlashX (1× as much) and $0.237 for GLM-5.3-Flash (1.6× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. GLM-4.7-FlashX has not been scored yet, GLM-5.3-Flash has an ECI of 151.9 and Step 3.5 Flash has not been scored yet.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for GLM-4.7-FlashX, GLM-5.3-Flash and Step 3.5 Flash 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?

GLM-5.3-Flash has the largest context window at 1,000,000 tokens, against 256,000 for Step 3.5 Flash and 200,000 for GLM-4.7-FlashX. Maximum output per response: GLM-4.7-FlashX up to 131,072, GLM-5.3-Flash up to 131,072, Step 3.5 Flash up to 256,000 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

GLM-4.7-FlashX accepts text; GLM-5.3-Flash accepts text, images, PDFs and video; Step 3.5 Flash accepts text. GLM-5.3-Flash handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

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

Which is newer?

GLM-5.3-Flash is the newest, released Aug 26, 2026. Step 3.5 Flash came out Jan 29, 2026; GLM-4.7-FlashX came out Jan 19, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: GLM-4.7-FlashX Apr 2025, Step 3.5 Flash Jan 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.