GLM-5V-Turbo vs QwQ 32B
GLM-5V-Turbo comes out ahead, 49 to 43 on our weighted score, though QwQ 32B is 2.6× cheaper per token.
- Our pick
Z.ai (Zhipu)GLM-5V-Turbo
49/100- ECI—
- Price$1.20 / $4.00
- Context200K
Alibaba (Qwen)QwQ 32B
43/100- ECI137.6
- Price$0.66 / $1.00
- Context131K
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
GLM-5V-Turbo is our pick
GLM-5V-Turbo is the better all-round choice, scoring 49/100 against QwQ 32B (43). It leads on inputs & features and context window. QwQ 32B wins on price. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
- CapabilityNot enough dataNo independent benchmark covers every model here yet
- Lowest priceQwQ 32BQwQ 32B $0.745 · GLM-5V-Turbo $1.90 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextGLM-5V-TurboGLM-5V-Turbo 200,000 · QwQ 32B 131,072 tokens
- Widest inputsGLM-5V-TurboGLM-5V-Turbo: Text, Images, PDFs, Video · QwQ 32B: Text
- Self-hostingQwQ 32BPublishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | GLM-5V-Turbo | QwQ 32B |
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 37 | 56 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 80 | 35 |
| Context window | 20% | 32 | 24 |
| Overall | 100% | 49/100 | 43/100 |
Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | GLM-5V-TurboZ.ai (Zhipu) | QwQ 32BAlibaba (Qwen) |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | 137.6 |
| ECI rank | — | #109 of 148 |
| GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions | — | 65.3% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics | — | 59.2% |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $1.20 | $0.66 (best) |
| Output | $4.00 | $1.00 (best) |
| Cached input | $0.24 | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $1.90 | $0.745 (best) |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Z.AI API | Median of 1 providers |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 200,000 tokens (best) | 131,072 tokens |
| Max output | 131,072 tokens (best) | 8,192 tokens |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | No |
| PDFs | Yes | No |
| Audio | No | No |
| Video | Yes | No |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | No |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| API model ID | glm-5v-turbo | — |
| API providers | 14 (best) | 1 |
| Released | Apr 1, 2026 | Mar 5, 2025 |
| Knowledge cutoff | — | Apr 2024 |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- GLM-5V-Turbo$20.00
- QwQ 32B$8.60
Which should you choose?
Which is better: GLM-5V-Turbo or QwQ 32B?
GLM-5V-Turbo is the better all-round choice, scoring 49/100 against QwQ 32B (43). It leads on inputs & features and context window. QwQ 32B wins on price. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
Which is cheaper, GLM-5V-Turbo or QwQ 32B?
QwQ 32B is cheaper at $0.66 input / $1.00 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider). GLM-5V-Turbo costs $1.20 input / $4.00 output per million tokens (official Z.AI API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.745 per million tokens for QwQ 32B versus $1.90 for GLM-5V-Turbo (2.6× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. GLM-5V-Turbo has not been scored yet and QwQ 32B has an ECI of 137.6.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for GLM-5V-Turbo and QwQ 32B yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
GLM-5V-Turbo has the largest context window at 200,000 tokens, against 131,072 for QwQ 32B. Maximum output per response: GLM-5V-Turbo up to 131,072, QwQ 32B up to 8,192 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
GLM-5V-Turbo accepts text, images, PDFs and video; QwQ 32B accepts text. GLM-5V-Turbo handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
QwQ 32B publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; GLM-5V-Turbo is proprietary.
Which is newer?
GLM-5V-Turbo is the newest, released Apr 1, 2026. QwQ 32B came out Mar 5, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: QwQ 32B Apr 2024.
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 Gemini Robotics-ER 1.6 PreviewThree-way comparison
- GLM-5V-Turbo vs Gemini Robotics-ER 1.6 PreviewGoogle
- GLM-5V-Turbo vs DeepSeek V4 ProDeepSeek
- GLM-5V-Turbo vs Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)xAI
- GLM-5V-Turbo vs Seed 2.1 ProByteDance Seed
- QwQ 32B vs GPT-4.1 miniOpenAI · ECI 135.0
- QwQ 32B vs DeepSeek-R1DeepSeek · ECI 139.0
