ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Nov 2, 2026

GLM-4.7 vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 comes out ahead, 79 to 55 and 55 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. Z.ai (Zhipu)

    GLM-4.7

    Released Dec 22, 2025

    55/100
    • ECI143.7
    • Price$0.60 / $2.20
    • Context205K
    Full specs Remove GLM-4.7
  2. Our pick

    DeepSeek

    DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017

    Released Oct 17, 2026New

    79/100
    • ECI158.8
    • Price$0.15 / $0.60
    • Context1M
    Full specs Remove DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017

  3. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507

    Released Jul 25, 2025

    55/100
    • ECI143.8
    • Price$0.30 / $2.90
    • Context262K
    Full specs Remove Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507
01 — Verdict

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 is our pick

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 is the better all-round choice, scoring 79/100 against Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507 (55) and GLM-4.7 (55). It leads on capability, price, inputs & features and context window. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityDeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017Capabilities Index (ECI): DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 158.8 · Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507 143.8 · GLM-4.7 143.7
  • Lowest priceDeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 $0.263 · Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507 $0.95 · GLM-4.7 $1.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextDeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 1,000,000 · Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507 262,144 · GLM-4.7 204,800 tokens
  • Widest inputsDeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017GLM-4.7: Text · DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017: Text, Images · Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507: Text
  • Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
How the score is built
MeasureWeightGLM-4.7DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%698769
Price25%487449
Inputs & features15%357035
Context window10%326037
Overall100%55/10079/10055/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

GLM-4.7 vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507 specifications side by side
SpecificationGLM-4.7Z.ai (Zhipu)DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017DeepSeekQwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507Alibaba (Qwen)
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)143.7158.8 (best)143.8
ECI rank#94 of 165#19 of 165 (best)#93 of 165
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions83.3%93.2% (best)80.1%
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics—71.2%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics83.3%99.4% (best)86.7%
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions32.2%42.5% (best)40.4%
Price per million tokens
Input$0.60$0.15 (best)$0.30
Output$2.20$0.60 (best)$2.90
Cached input$0.11$0.003 (best)—
Blended (3:1)$1.00$0.263 (best)$0.95
Long-context rateSame rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceOfficial Z.AI APIOfficial DeepSeek APIMedian of 11 providers
Limits
Context window204,800 tokens1,000,000 tokens (best)262,144 tokens
Max output131,072 tokens384,000 tokens (best)81,920 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesNoYesNo
PDFsNoNoNo
AudioNoNoNo
VideoNoNoNo
ReasoningYesYeslow · high · maxYes
Tool callingYesYesYes
Structured outputNoYesNo
Availability
WeightsOpenOpenMITOpenApache 2.0
API model IDglm-4.7deepseek-flash—
API providers3140 (best)12
ReleasedDec 22, 2025Oct 17, 2026Jul 25, 2025
Knowledge cutoffApr 2025May 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$10.40
  • DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017$2.70
  • Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507$8.80
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: GLM-4.7, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 or Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507?

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 is the better all-round choice, scoring 79/100 against Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507 (55) and GLM-4.7 (55). It leads on capability, price, inputs & features and context window. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, GLM-4.7, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 or Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507?

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 is cheaper at $0.15 input / $0.60 output per million tokens (official DeepSeek API price). Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507 costs $0.30 input / $2.90 output per million tokens (median across 11 API providers); GLM-4.7 costs $0.60 input / $2.20 output per million tokens (official Z.AI API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.263 per million tokens for DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 versus $0.95 for Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507 (3.6× as much) and $1.00 for GLM-4.7 (3.8× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 158.8 (#19 of 165), Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507 143.8 (#93 of 165) and GLM-4.7 143.7 (#94 of 165). Their confidence ranges do not overlap (156.7–162.2 vs 141.9–145.2), so the gap is a real one. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 93.2%, GLM-4.7 83.3%, Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507 80.1%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 99.4%, Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507 86.7%, GLM-4.7 83.3%; SimpleQA Verified — DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 42.5%, Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507 40.4%, GLM-4.7 32.2%.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for GLM-4.7, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 and Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507 yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. All three support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 has the largest context window at 1,000,000 tokens, against 262,144 for Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507 and 204,800 for GLM-4.7. Maximum output per response: GLM-4.7 up to 131,072, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 up to 384,000, Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507 up to 81,920 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

GLM-4.7 accepts text; DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 accepts text and images; Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507 accepts text. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Yes, all three publish their weights (MIT and Apache 2.0), so you can self-host them.

Which is newer?

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 is the newest, released Oct 17, 2026. GLM-4.7 came out Dec 22, 2025; Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507 came out Jul 25, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: GLM-4.7 Apr 2025, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 May 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