ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin vs GLM-4.6

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin comes out ahead, 65 to 42 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. Our pick

    inclusionAI

    Ling 3.0 Flash Fin

    Released Aug 27, 2026

    65/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.075 / $0.22
    • Context262K
    Full specs Remove Ling 3.0 Flash Fin

  2. Z.ai (Zhipu)

    GLM-4.6

    Released Sep 30, 2025

    42/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.60 / $2.20
    • Context205K
    Full specs Remove GLM-4.6

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is our pick

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is the better all-round choice, scoring 65/100 against GLM-4.6 (42). It leads on price and context window. 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 priceLing 3.0 Flash FinLing 3.0 Flash Fin $0.111 · GLM-4.6 $1.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextLing 3.0 Flash FinLing 3.0 Flash Fin 262,144 · GLM-4.6 204,800 tokens
  • Widest inputsSame inputsLing 3.0 Flash Fin: Text · GLM-4.6: Text
  • Self-hostingGLM-4.6Publishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightLing 3.0 Flash FinGLM-4.6
Price50%9550
Inputs & features30%3535
Context window20%3732
Overall100%65/10042/100

Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.

02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

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

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin vs GLM-4.6 specifications side by side
SpecificationLing 3.0 Flash FininclusionAIGLM-4.6Z.ai (Zhipu)
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)——
ECI rank——
Price per million tokens
Input$0.075 (best)$0.60
Output$0.22 (best)$2.20
Cached input—$0.11
Blended (3:1)$0.111 (best)$1.00
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceMedian of 1 providersOfficial Z.AI API
Limits
Context window262,144 tokens (best)204,800 tokens
Max output32,768 tokens131,072 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesNoNo
PDFsNoNo
AudioNoNo
VideoNoNo
ReasoningYesYes
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputNoNo
Availability
WeightsProprietaryOpen
API model ID—glm-4.6
API providers218 (best)
ReleasedAug 27, 2026Sep 30, 2025
Knowledge cutoff—Apr 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.

  • Ling 3.0 Flash Fin$1.19
  • GLM-4.6$10.40
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Ling 3.0 Flash Fin or GLM-4.6?

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is the better all-round choice, scoring 65/100 against GLM-4.6 (42). It leads on price and context window. 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, Ling 3.0 Flash Fin or GLM-4.6?

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is cheaper at $0.075 input / $0.22 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider). GLM-4.6 costs $0.60 input / $2.20 output per million tokens (official Z.AI API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.111 per million tokens for Ling 3.0 Flash Fin versus $1.00 for GLM-4.6 (9× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. Ling 3.0 Flash Fin has not been scored yet and GLM-4.6 has not been scored yet.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Ling 3.0 Flash Fin and GLM-4.6 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?

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin has the largest context window at 262,144 tokens, against 204,800 for GLM-4.6. Maximum output per response: Ling 3.0 Flash Fin up to 32,768, GLM-4.6 up to 131,072 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin accepts text; GLM-4.6 accepts text. They handle the same number of input types.

Are any of these open source?

GLM-4.6 publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is the newest, released Aug 27, 2026. GLM-4.6 came out Sep 30, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: GLM-4.6 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.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons