GLM-5 vs Qwen3.5 397B-A17B vs Qwen3 Max
Qwen3.5 397B-A17B comes out ahead, 65 to 55 and 50 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.
Z.ai (Zhipu)GLM-5
55/100- ECI145.8
- Price$1.00 / $3.20
- Context205K
- Our pick
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen3.5 397B-A17B
65/100- ECI146.7
- Price$0.60 / $3.60
- Context262K
- Alibaba (Qwen)
Qwen3 Max
50/100- ECI142.4
- Price$1.20 / $6.00
- Context262K
Qwen3.5 397B-A17B is our pick
Qwen3.5 397B-A17B is the better all-round choice, scoring 65/100 against GLM-5 (55) and Qwen3 Max (50). It leads on price and inputs & features. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
- CapabilityQwen3.5 397B-A17BCapabilities Index (ECI): Qwen3.5 397B-A17B 146.7 · GLM-5 145.8 · Qwen3 Max 142.4
- Lowest priceQwen3.5 397B-A17BQwen3.5 397B-A17B $1.35 · GLM-5 $1.55 · Qwen3 Max $2.40 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextQwen3.5 397B-A17B and Qwen3 MaxQwen3.5 397B-A17B 262,144 · Qwen3 Max 262,144 · GLM-5 204,800 tokens
- Widest inputsQwen3.5 397B-A17BGLM-5: Text · Qwen3.5 397B-A17B: Text, Images, Audio, Video · Qwen3 Max: Text
- Self-hostingGLM-5 and Qwen3.5 397B-A17BPublishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | GLM-5 | Qwen3.5 397B-A17B | Qwen3 Max |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI) | 50% | 73 | 74 | 68 |
| Price | 25% | 41 | 44 | 32 |
| Inputs & features | 15% | 35 | 90 | 25 |
| Context window | 10% | 32 | 37 | 37 |
| Overall | 100% | 55/100 | 65/100 | 50/100 |
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | GLM-5Z.ai (Zhipu) | Qwen3.5 397B-A17BAlibaba (Qwen) | Qwen3 MaxAlibaba (Qwen) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | 145.8 | 146.7 (best) | 142.4 |
| ECI rank | #74 of 148 | #67 of 148 (best) | #91 of 148 |
| GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions | 87.8% (best) | 86.4% | 72.6% |
| FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics | — | 31.2% (best) | 19.0% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics | 80.0% | 88.9% (best) | 73.3% |
| SWE-bench VerifiedFixing real GitHub issues | 72.1% | — | — |
| SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions | — | — | 48.8% |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $1.00 | $0.60 (best) | $1.20 |
| Output | $3.20 (best) | $3.60 | $6.00 |
| Cached input | $0.20 | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $1.55 | $1.35 (best) | $2.40 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Z.AI API | Official Alibaba API | Official Alibaba API |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 204,800 tokens | 262,144 tokens (best) | 262,144 tokens (best) |
| Max output | 131,072 tokens (best) | 65,536 tokens | 65,536 tokens |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | Yes | No |
| PDFs | No | No | No |
| Audio | No | Yes | No |
| Video | No | Yes | No |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yes | No |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | Yes | No |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Open | Open | Proprietary |
| API model ID | glm-5 | qwen3.5-397b-a17b | qwen3-max |
| API providers | 27 (best) | 23 | 16 |
| Released | Feb 12, 2026 | Feb 15, 2026 | Sep 23, 2025 |
| Knowledge cutoff | — | — | Apr 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
- Qwen3.5 397B-A17B$13.20
- Qwen3 Max$24.00
Which should you choose?
Which is better: GLM-5, Qwen3.5 397B-A17B or Qwen3 Max?
Qwen3.5 397B-A17B is the better all-round choice, scoring 65/100 against GLM-5 (55) and Qwen3 Max (50). It leads on price and inputs & features. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
Which is cheaper, GLM-5, Qwen3.5 397B-A17B or Qwen3 Max?
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); Qwen3 Max costs $1.20 input / $6.00 output per million tokens (official Alibaba 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 $2.40 for Qwen3 Max (1.8× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
Qwen3.5 397B-A17B scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Qwen3.5 397B-A17B 146.7 (#67 of 148), GLM-5 145.8 (#74 of 148) and Qwen3 Max 142.4 (#91 of 148). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (144.8–148.2 vs 143.9–147.7), so treat the gap as small. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — GLM-5 87.8%, Qwen3.5 397B-A17B 86.4%, Qwen3 Max 72.6%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — Qwen3.5 397B-A17B 88.9%, GLM-5 80.0%, Qwen3 Max 73.3%.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Qwen3.5 397B-A17B and Qwen3 Max yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Qwen3.5 397B-A17B 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 397B-A17B and Qwen3 Max have the largest context windows (262,144 and 262,144 tokens), against 204,800 for GLM-5. Maximum output per response: GLM-5 up to 131,072, Qwen3.5 397B-A17B up to 65,536, Qwen3 Max up to 65,536 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
GLM-5 accepts text; Qwen3.5 397B-A17B accepts text, images, audio and video; Qwen3 Max accepts text. Qwen3.5 397B-A17B 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; Qwen3 Max is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Qwen3.5 397B-A17B is the newest, released Feb 15, 2026. GLM-5 came out Feb 12, 2026; Qwen3 Max came out Sep 23, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Qwen3 Max 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.
Related comparisons
- 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
- Qwen3.5 397B-A17B vs Kimi K2.5Moonshot AI · ECI 148.0
- Qwen3.5 397B-A17B vs GPT-5.4 miniOpenAI · ECI 148.8
- Qwen3.5 397B-A17B vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55BNVIDIA · ECI 146.2
