ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

GLM-5 vs Gemini 3.5 Flash vs Qwen3.5 397B-A17B

Gemini 3.5 Flash comes out ahead, 69 to 65 and 55 on our weighted score, though Qwen3.5 397B-A17B is 2.5× cheaper per token.

  1. Z.ai (Zhipu)

    GLM-5

    Released Feb 12, 2026

    55/100
    • ECI145.8
    • Price$1.00 / $3.20
    • Context205K
  2. Our pick

    Google

    Gemini 3.5 Flash

    Released May 19, 2026

    69/100
    • ECI154.5
    • Price$1.50 / $9.00
    • Context1.05M
  3. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3.5 397B-A17B

    Released Feb 15, 2026

    65/100
    • ECI146.7
    • Price$0.60 / $3.60
    • Context262K
01 — Verdict

Gemini 3.5 Flash is our pick

Gemini 3.5 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 69/100 against Qwen3.5 397B-A17B (65) and GLM-5 (55). It leads on capability, inputs & features and context window. Qwen3.5 397B-A17B wins on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityGemini 3.5 FlashCapabilities Index (ECI): Gemini 3.5 Flash 154.5 · Qwen3.5 397B-A17B 146.7 · GLM-5 145.8
  • Lowest priceQwen3.5 397B-A17BQwen3.5 397B-A17B $1.35 · GLM-5 $1.55 · Gemini 3.5 Flash $3.38 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextGemini 3.5 FlashGemini 3.5 Flash 1,048,576 · Qwen3.5 397B-A17B 262,144 · GLM-5 204,800 tokens
  • Widest inputsGemini 3.5 FlashGLM-5: Text · Gemini 3.5 Flash: Text, Images, PDFs, Audio, Video · Qwen3.5 397B-A17B: Text, Images, Audio, Video
  • Self-hostingGLM-5 and Qwen3.5 397B-A17BPublishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightGLM-5Gemini 3.5 FlashQwen3.5 397B-A17B
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%738474
Price25%412544
Inputs & features15%3510090
Context window10%326137
Overall100%55/10069/10065/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

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

GLM-5 vs Gemini 3.5 Flash vs Qwen3.5 397B-A17B specifications side by side
SpecificationGLM-5Z.ai (Zhipu)Gemini 3.5 FlashGoogleQwen3.5 397B-A17BAlibaba (Qwen)
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)145.8154.5 (best)146.7
ECI rank#74 of 148#33 of 148 (best)#67 of 148
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions87.8%92.8% (best)86.4%
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics—62.8% (best)31.2%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics80.0%95.6% (best)88.9%
SWE-bench VerifiedFixing real GitHub issues72.1%79.3% (best)—
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions—66.2%—
Price per million tokens
Input$1.00$1.50$0.60 (best)
Output$3.20 (best)$9.00$3.60
Cached input$0.20$0.15 (best)—
Blended (3:1)$1.55$3.38$1.35 (best)
Long-context rateSame rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceOfficial Z.AI APIOfficial Google APIOfficial Alibaba API
Limits
Context window204,800 tokens1,048,576 tokens (best)262,144 tokens
Max output131,072 tokens (best)65,536 tokens65,536 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesNoYesYes
PDFsNoYesNo
AudioNoYesYes
VideoNoYesYes
ReasoningYesYesminimal · low · medium · highYes
Tool callingYesYesYes
Structured outputNoYesYes
Availability
WeightsOpenProprietaryOpen
API model IDglm-5gemini-3.5-flashqwen3.5-397b-a17b
API providers2732 (best)23
ReleasedFeb 12, 2026May 19, 2026Feb 15, 2026
Knowledge cutoff—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-5$16.40
  • Gemini 3.5 Flash$33.00
  • Qwen3.5 397B-A17B$13.20
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: GLM-5, Gemini 3.5 Flash or Qwen3.5 397B-A17B?

Gemini 3.5 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 69/100 against Qwen3.5 397B-A17B (65) and GLM-5 (55). It leads on capability, inputs & features and context window. Qwen3.5 397B-A17B wins on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, GLM-5, Gemini 3.5 Flash or Qwen3.5 397B-A17B?

Qwen3.5 397B-A17B is cheaper at $0.60 input / $3.60 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). GLM-5 costs $1.00 input / $3.20 output per million tokens (official Z.AI API price); Gemini 3.5 Flash costs $1.50 input / $9.00 output per million tokens (official Google API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $1.35 per million tokens for Qwen3.5 397B-A17B versus $1.55 for GLM-5 (1.1× as much) and $3.38 for Gemini 3.5 Flash (2.5× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

Gemini 3.5 Flash scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Gemini 3.5 Flash 154.5 (#33 of 148), Qwen3.5 397B-A17B 146.7 (#67 of 148) and GLM-5 145.8 (#74 of 148). Their confidence ranges do not overlap (152.5–156.6 vs 144.8–148.2), so the gap is a real one. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — Gemini 3.5 Flash 92.8%, GLM-5 87.8%, Qwen3.5 397B-A17B 86.4%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — Gemini 3.5 Flash 95.6%, Qwen3.5 397B-A17B 88.9%, GLM-5 80.0%.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Qwen3.5 397B-A17B yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Gemini 3.5 Flash 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?

Gemini 3.5 Flash has the largest context window at 1,048,576 tokens, against 262,144 for Qwen3.5 397B-A17B and 204,800 for GLM-5. Maximum output per response: GLM-5 up to 131,072, Gemini 3.5 Flash up to 65,536, Qwen3.5 397B-A17B up to 65,536 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

GLM-5 accepts text; Gemini 3.5 Flash accepts text, images, PDFs, audio and video; Qwen3.5 397B-A17B accepts text, images, audio and video. Gemini 3.5 Flash handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

GLM-5 and Qwen3.5 397B-A17B publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Gemini 3.5 Flash is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Gemini 3.5 Flash is the newest, released May 19, 2026. Qwen3.5 397B-A17B came out Feb 15, 2026; GLM-5 came out Feb 12, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: Gemini 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.