ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

GLM-4.7 vs Qwen3.5 27B

Qwen3.5 27B comes out ahead, 61 to 42 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. Z.ai (Zhipu)

    GLM-4.7

    Released Dec 22, 2025

    42/100
    • ECI143.5
    • Price$0.60 / $2.20
    • Context205K
    Full specs Remove GLM-4.7
  2. Our pick

    Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3.5 27B

    Released Feb 23, 2026

    61/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.30 / $2.40
    • Context262K
    Full specs Remove Qwen3.5 27B

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

Qwen3.5 27B is our pick

Qwen3.5 27B is the better all-round choice, scoring 61/100 against GLM-4.7 (42). It leads on price, 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 priceQwen3.5 27BQwen3.5 27B $0.825 · GLM-4.7 $1.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextQwen3.5 27BQwen3.5 27B 262,144 · GLM-4.7 204,800 tokens
  • Widest inputsQwen3.5 27BGLM-4.7: Text · Qwen3.5 27B: 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-4.7Qwen3.5 27B
Price50%5054
Inputs & features30%3590
Context window20%3237
Overall100%42/10061/100

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 vs Qwen3.5 27B specifications side by side
SpecificationGLM-4.7Z.ai (Zhipu)Qwen3.5 27BAlibaba (Qwen)
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)143.5—
ECI rank#84 of 148—
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions83.3%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics83.3%—
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions32.2%—
Price per million tokens
Input$0.60$0.30 (best)
Output$2.20 (best)$2.40
Cached input$0.11—
Blended (3:1)$1.00$0.825 (best)
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceOfficial Z.AI APIOfficial Alibaba API
Limits
Context window204,800 tokens262,144 tokens (best)
Max output131,072 tokens (best)65,536 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesNoYes
PDFsNoNo
AudioNoYes
VideoNoYes
ReasoningYesYes
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputNoYes
Availability
WeightsOpenOpen
API model IDglm-4.7qwen3.5-27b
API providers20 (best)16
ReleasedDec 22, 2025Feb 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
  • Qwen3.5 27B$7.80
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: GLM-4.7 or Qwen3.5 27B?

Qwen3.5 27B is the better all-round choice, scoring 61/100 against GLM-4.7 (42). It leads on price, 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 or Qwen3.5 27B?

Qwen3.5 27B is cheaper at $0.30 input / $2.40 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 $0.825 per million tokens for Qwen3.5 27B versus $1.00 for GLM-4.7 (1.2× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. GLM-4.7 has an ECI of 143.5 and Qwen3.5 27B has not been scored yet.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for GLM-4.7 and Qwen3.5 27B 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?

Qwen3.5 27B has the largest context window at 262,144 tokens, against 204,800 for GLM-4.7. Maximum output per response: GLM-4.7 up to 131,072, Qwen3.5 27B up to 65,536 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

GLM-4.7 accepts text; Qwen3.5 27B accepts text, images, audio and video. Qwen3.5 27B 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?

Qwen3.5 27B is the newest, released 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