ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

GLM-5.3-Flash vs Qwen3.7 Plus

GLM-5.3-Flash comes out ahead, 80 to 70 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. Our pick

    Z.ai (Zhipu)

    GLM-5.3-Flash

    Released Aug 26, 2026

    80/100
    • ECI151.9
    • Price$0.15 / $0.50
    • Context1M
    Full specs Remove GLM-5.3-Flash

  2. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3.7 Plus

    Released Jun 2, 2026

    70/100
    • ECI147.4
    • Price$0.40 / $1.60
    • Context1M
    Full specs Remove Qwen3.7 Plus

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

GLM-5.3-Flash is our pick

GLM-5.3-Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 80/100 against Qwen3.7 Plus (70). It leads on capability, price and inputs & features. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityGLM-5.3-FlashCapabilities Index (ECI): GLM-5.3-Flash 151.9 · Qwen3.7 Plus 147.4
  • Lowest priceGLM-5.3-FlashGLM-5.3-Flash $0.237 · Qwen3.7 Plus $0.70 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextAbout the sameGLM-5.3-Flash 1,000,000 · Qwen3.7 Plus 1,000,000 tokens
  • Widest inputsGLM-5.3-FlashGLM-5.3-Flash: Text, Images, PDFs, Video · Qwen3.7 Plus: Text, Images, Video
  • Self-hostingGLM-5.3-FlashPublishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightGLM-5.3-FlashQwen3.7 Plus
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%8175
Price25%7957
Inputs & features15%9080
Context window10%6060
Overall100%80/10070/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

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

GLM-5.3-Flash vs Qwen3.7 Plus specifications side by side
SpecificationGLM-5.3-FlashZ.ai (Zhipu)Qwen3.7 PlusAlibaba (Qwen)
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)151.9 (best)147.4
ECI rank#42 of 148 (best)#61 of 148
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions90.2% (best)87.9%
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics55.8% (best)34.4%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics93.9% (best)93.3%
Price per million tokens
Input$0.15 (best)$0.40
Output$0.50 (best)$1.60
Cached input$0.03 (best)$0.04
Blended (3:1)$0.237 (best)$0.70
Long-context rateSame rateOver 256K: $1.20 / $4.80
Price sourceOfficial Z.AI APIOfficial Alibaba API
Limits
Context window1,000,000 tokens1,000,000 tokens
Max output131,072 tokens (best)64,000 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesYesYes
PDFsYesNo
AudioNoNo
VideoYesYes
ReasoningYeslow · high · maxYes
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputYesYes
Availability
WeightsOpenProprietary
API model IDglm-5.3-flashqwen3.7-plus
API providers65 (best)25
ReleasedAug 26, 2026Jun 2, 2026
Knowledge cutoff—Apr 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-5.3-Flash$2.50
  • Qwen3.7 Plus$7.20
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: GLM-5.3-Flash or Qwen3.7 Plus?

GLM-5.3-Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 80/100 against Qwen3.7 Plus (70). It leads on capability, price and inputs & features. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, GLM-5.3-Flash or Qwen3.7 Plus?

GLM-5.3-Flash is cheaper at $0.15 input / $0.50 output per million tokens (official Z.AI API price). Qwen3.7 Plus costs $0.40 input / $1.60 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.237 per million tokens for GLM-5.3-Flash versus $0.70 for Qwen3.7 Plus (2.9× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

GLM-5.3-Flash scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): GLM-5.3-Flash 151.9 (#42 of 148) and Qwen3.7 Plus 147.4 (#61 of 148). Their confidence ranges do not overlap (149.4–154.3 vs 145.7–148.9), so the gap is a real one. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — GLM-5.3-Flash 90.2%, Qwen3.7 Plus 87.9%; FrontierMath Tiers 1–3 — GLM-5.3-Flash 55.8%, Qwen3.7 Plus 34.4%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — GLM-5.3-Flash 93.9%, Qwen3.7 Plus 93.3%.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for GLM-5.3-Flash and Qwen3.7 Plus yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, GLM-5.3-Flash leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

GLM-5.3-Flash and Qwen3.7 Plus share the same 1,000,000-token context window. Maximum output per response: GLM-5.3-Flash up to 131,072, Qwen3.7 Plus up to 64,000 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

GLM-5.3-Flash accepts text, images, PDFs and video; Qwen3.7 Plus accepts text, images and video. GLM-5.3-Flash handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

GLM-5.3-Flash publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Qwen3.7 Plus is proprietary.

Which is newer?

GLM-5.3-Flash is the newest, released Aug 26, 2026. Qwen3.7 Plus came out Jun 2, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: Qwen3.7 Plus 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