ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

GLM-4.7 vs MiniMax-M2.7 vs Qwen3.5 35B-A3B

Qwen3.5 35B-A3B comes out ahead, 66 to 61 and 56 on our weighted score, though MiniMax-M2.7 is 24% cheaper per token.

  1. Z.ai (Zhipu)

    GLM-4.7

    Released Dec 22, 2025

    56/100
    • ECI143.5
    • Price$0.60 / $2.20
    • Context205K
    Full specs Remove GLM-4.7

  2. MiniMax

    MiniMax-M2.7

    Released Mar 18, 2026

    61/100
    • ECI145.9
    • Price$0.30 / $1.20
    • Context205K
    Full specs Remove MiniMax-M2.7
  3. Our pick

    Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3.5 35B-A3B

    Released Feb 23, 2026

    66/100
    • ECI142.5
    • Price$0.25 / $2.00
    • Context262K
    Full specs Remove Qwen3.5 35B-A3B
01 — Verdict

Qwen3.5 35B-A3B is our pick

Qwen3.5 35B-A3B is the better all-round choice, scoring 66/100 against MiniMax-M2.7 (61) and GLM-4.7 (56). It leads on inputs & features and context window. MiniMax-M2.7 wins on capability and price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityMiniMax-M2.7Capabilities Index (ECI): MiniMax-M2.7 145.9 · GLM-4.7 143.5 · Qwen3.5 35B-A3B 142.5
  • Lowest priceMiniMax-M2.7MiniMax-M2.7 $0.525 · Qwen3.5 35B-A3B $0.688 · GLM-4.7 $1.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextQwen3.5 35B-A3BQwen3.5 35B-A3B 262,144 · GLM-4.7 204,800 · MiniMax-M2.7 204,800 tokens
  • Widest inputsQwen3.5 35B-A3BGLM-4.7: Text · MiniMax-M2.7: Text · Qwen3.5 35B-A3B: Text, Images, Audio, Video
  • Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
How the score is built
MeasureWeightGLM-4.7MiniMax-M2.7Qwen3.5 35B-A3B
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%707369
Price25%506358
Inputs & features15%353590
Context window10%323237
Overall100%56/10061/10066/100
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 MiniMax-M2.7 vs Qwen3.5 35B-A3B specifications side by side
SpecificationGLM-4.7Z.ai (Zhipu)MiniMax-M2.7MiniMaxQwen3.5 35B-A3BAlibaba (Qwen)
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)143.5145.9 (best)142.5
ECI rank#84 of 148#73 of 148 (best)#88 of 148
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions83.3%—83.5% (best)
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics83.3% (best)—70.0%
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions32.2%——
Price per million tokens
Input$0.60$0.30$0.25 (best)
Output$2.20$1.20 (best)$2.00
Cached input$0.11$0.06 (best)—
Blended (3:1)$1.00$0.525 (best)$0.688
Long-context rateSame rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceOfficial Z.AI APIOfficial MiniMax (minimax.io) APIOfficial Alibaba API
Limits
Context window204,800 tokens204,800 tokens262,144 tokens (best)
Max output131,072 tokens (best)131,072 tokens (best)65,536 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesNoNoYes
PDFsNoNoNo
AudioNoNoYes
VideoNoNoYes
ReasoningYesYesYes
Tool callingYesYesYes
Structured outputNoNoYes
Availability
WeightsOpenOpenOpen
API model IDglm-4.7MiniMax-M2.7qwen3.5-35b-a3b
API providers2029 (best)18
ReleasedDec 22, 2025Mar 18, 2026Feb 23, 2026
Knowledge cutoffApr 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
  • MiniMax-M2.7$5.40
  • Qwen3.5 35B-A3B$6.50
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: GLM-4.7, MiniMax-M2.7 or Qwen3.5 35B-A3B?

Qwen3.5 35B-A3B is the better all-round choice, scoring 66/100 against MiniMax-M2.7 (61) and GLM-4.7 (56). It leads on inputs & features and context window. MiniMax-M2.7 wins on capability and price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, GLM-4.7, MiniMax-M2.7 or Qwen3.5 35B-A3B?

MiniMax-M2.7 is cheaper at $0.30 input / $1.20 output per million tokens (official MiniMax (minimax.io) API price). Qwen3.5 35B-A3B costs $0.25 input / $2.00 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price); 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 $0.525 per million tokens for MiniMax-M2.7 versus $0.688 for Qwen3.5 35B-A3B (1.3× as much) and $1.00 for GLM-4.7 (1.9× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

MiniMax-M2.7 scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): MiniMax-M2.7 145.9 (#73 of 148), GLM-4.7 143.5 (#84 of 148) and Qwen3.5 35B-A3B 142.5 (#88 of 148). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (138.2–148.0 vs 141.3–145.6), so treat the gap as small.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for GLM-4.7, MiniMax-M2.7 and Qwen3.5 35B-A3B yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, MiniMax-M2.7 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?

Qwen3.5 35B-A3B has the largest context window at 262,144 tokens, against 204,800 for GLM-4.7 and 204,800 for MiniMax-M2.7. Maximum output per response: GLM-4.7 up to 131,072, MiniMax-M2.7 up to 131,072, Qwen3.5 35B-A3B up to 65,536 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

GLM-4.7 accepts text; MiniMax-M2.7 accepts text; Qwen3.5 35B-A3B accepts text, images, audio and video. Qwen3.5 35B-A3B 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?

MiniMax-M2.7 is the newest, released Mar 18, 2026. Qwen3.5 35B-A3B came out Feb 23, 2026; GLM-4.7 came out Dec 22, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: GLM-4.7 Apr 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.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons