GLM-5 vs Qwen3.7 Max
Qwen3.7 Max comes out ahead, 58 to 55 on our weighted score, though GLM-5 is 2.4× cheaper per token.
Z.ai (Zhipu)
GLM-5
55/100- ECI145.8
- Price$1.00 / $3.20
- Context205K
- Our pick
Alibaba (Qwen)
Qwen3.7 Max
58/100- ECI153.7
- Price$2.50 / $7.50
- Context1M
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
Qwen3.7 Max is our pick
Qwen3.7 Max is the better all-round choice, scoring 58/100 against GLM-5 (55). It leads on capability and context window. GLM-5 wins on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
- CapabilityQwen3.7 MaxCapabilities Index (ECI): Qwen3.7 Max 153.7 · GLM-5 145.8
- Lowest priceGLM-5GLM-5 $1.55 · Qwen3.7 Max $3.75 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextQwen3.7 MaxQwen3.7 Max 1,000,000 · GLM-5 204,800 tokens
- Widest inputsSame inputsGLM-5: Text · Qwen3.7 Max: Text
- Self-hostingGLM-5Publishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | GLM-5 | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|---|
| CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI) | 50% | 73 | 83 |
| Price | 25% | 41 | 23 |
| Inputs & features | 15% | 35 | 35 |
| Context window | 10% | 32 | 60 |
| Overall | 100% | 55/100 | 58/100 |
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | ||
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | 145.8 | 153.7 (best) |
| ECI rank | #74 of 148 | #37 of 148 (best) |
| GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions | 87.8% | 90.9% (best) |
| FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics | — | 64.6% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics | 80.0% | 95.6% (best) |
| SWE-bench VerifiedFixing real GitHub issues | 72.1% | 77.3% (best) |
| SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions | — | 55.8% |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $1.00 (best) | $2.50 |
| Output | $3.20 (best) | $7.50 |
| Cached input | $0.20 (best) | $0.50 |
| Blended (3:1) | $1.55 (best) | $3.75 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Z.AI API | Official Alibaba API |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 204,800 tokens | 1,000,000 tokens (best) |
| Max output | 131,072 tokens (best) | 65,536 tokens |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | No |
| PDFs | No | No |
| Audio | No | No |
| Video | No | No |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | No |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| API model ID | glm-5 | qwen3.7-max |
| API providers | 27 (best) | 26 |
| Released | Feb 12, 2026 | May 21, 2026 |
| Knowledge cutoff | — | — |
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
Qwen3.7 Max$40.00
Which should you choose?
Which is better: GLM-5 or Qwen3.7 Max?
Qwen3.7 Max is the better all-round choice, scoring 58/100 against GLM-5 (55). It leads on capability 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 Qwen3.7 Max?
GLM-5 is cheaper at $1.00 input / $3.20 output per million tokens (official Z.AI API price). Qwen3.7 Max costs $2.50 input / $7.50 output per million tokens (official Alibaba 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 $3.75 for Qwen3.7 Max (2.4× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
Qwen3.7 Max scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Qwen3.7 Max 153.7 (#37 of 148) and GLM-5 145.8 (#74 of 148). Their confidence ranges do not overlap (151.9–156.0 vs 143.9–147.7), so the gap is a real one. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — Qwen3.7 Max 90.9%, GLM-5 87.8%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — Qwen3.7 Max 95.6%, GLM-5 80.0%; SWE-bench Verified — Qwen3.7 Max 77.3%, GLM-5 72.1%.
Which is better for coding?
Qwen3.7 Max resolves more real GitHub issues on SWE-bench Verified: Qwen3.7 Max 77.3% and GLM-5 72.1%. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen3.7 Max has the largest context window at 1,000,000 tokens, against 204,800 for GLM-5. Maximum output per response: GLM-5 up to 131,072, Qwen3.7 Max up to 65,536 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
GLM-5 accepts text; Qwen3.7 Max accepts text. They handle the same number of input types.
Are any of these open source?
GLM-5 publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Qwen3.7 Max is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Qwen3.7 Max is the newest, released May 21, 2026. GLM-5 came out Feb 12, 2026.
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.