GLM-5 vs Gemini 3.5 Flash
Gemini 3.5 Flash comes out ahead, 69 to 55 on our weighted score, though GLM-5 is 2.2× cheaper per token.
Z.ai (Zhipu)GLM-5
55/100- ECI145.8
- Price$1.00 / $3.20
- Context205K
- Our pick
GoogleGemini 3.5 Flash
69/100- ECI154.5
- Price$1.50 / $9.00
- Context1.05M
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
Gemini 3.5 Flash is our pick
Gemini 3.5 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 69/100 against GLM-5 (55). It leads on capability, inputs & features and context window. GLM-5 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 · GLM-5 145.8
- Lowest priceGLM-5GLM-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 · GLM-5 204,800 tokens
- Widest inputsGemini 3.5 FlashGLM-5: Text · Gemini 3.5 Flash: Text, Images, PDFs, Audio, Video
- Self-hostingGLM-5Publishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | GLM-5 | Gemini 3.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|---|
| CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI) | 50% | 73 | 84 |
| Price | 25% | 41 | 25 |
| Inputs & features | 15% | 35 | 100 |
| Context window | 10% | 32 | 61 |
| Overall | 100% | 55/100 | 69/100 |
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | GLM-5Z.ai (Zhipu) | Gemini 3.5 FlashGoogle |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | 145.8 | 154.5 (best) |
| ECI rank | #74 of 148 | #33 of 148 (best) |
| GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions | 87.8% | 92.8% (best) |
| FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics | — | 62.8% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics | 80.0% | 95.6% (best) |
| SWE-bench VerifiedFixing real GitHub issues | 72.1% | 79.3% (best) |
| SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions | — | 66.2% |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $1.00 (best) | $1.50 |
| Output | $3.20 (best) | $9.00 |
| Cached input | $0.20 | $0.15 (best) |
| Blended (3:1) | $1.55 (best) | $3.38 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Z.AI API | Official Google API |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 204,800 tokens | 1,048,576 tokens (best) |
| Max output | 131,072 tokens (best) | 65,536 tokens |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | Yes |
| PDFs | No | Yes |
| Audio | No | Yes |
| Video | No | Yes |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yesminimal · low · medium · high |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | Yes |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| API model ID | glm-5 | gemini-3.5-flash |
| API providers | 27 | 32 (best) |
| Released | Feb 12, 2026 | May 19, 2026 |
| Knowledge cutoff | — | Jan 2025 |
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
Which should you choose?
Which is better: GLM-5 or Gemini 3.5 Flash?
Gemini 3.5 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 69/100 against GLM-5 (55). It leads on capability, inputs & features and context window. GLM-5 wins on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
Which is cheaper, GLM-5 or Gemini 3.5 Flash?
GLM-5 is cheaper at $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 $1.55 per million tokens for GLM-5 versus $3.38 for Gemini 3.5 Flash (2.2× 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) and GLM-5 145.8 (#74 of 148). Their confidence ranges do not overlap (152.5–156.6 vs 143.9–147.7), so the gap is a real one. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — Gemini 3.5 Flash 92.8%, GLM-5 87.8%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — Gemini 3.5 Flash 95.6%, GLM-5 80.0%; SWE-bench Verified — Gemini 3.5 Flash 79.3%, GLM-5 72.1%.
Which is better for coding?
Gemini 3.5 Flash resolves more real GitHub issues on SWE-bench Verified: Gemini 3.5 Flash 79.3% and GLM-5 72.1%. Both 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 204,800 for GLM-5. Maximum output per response: GLM-5 up to 131,072, Gemini 3.5 Flash 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. Gemini 3.5 Flash handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
GLM-5 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. 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.
Related comparisons
- Add Qwen3.5 397B-A17BThree-way comparison
- GLM-5 vs Qwen3.5 397B-A17BAlibaba (Qwen) · ECI 146.7
- GLM-5 vs Kimi K2 ThinkingMoonshot AI · ECI 146.0
- GLM-5 vs GPT-5.4 miniOpenAI · ECI 148.8
- GLM-5 vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55BNVIDIA · ECI 146.2
- Gemini 3.5 Flash vs Qwen3.7 MaxAlibaba (Qwen) · ECI 153.7
- Gemini 3.5 Flash vs Grok 4.5xAI · ECI 154.0
