Qwen-VL OCR vs GLM-4.5V
GLM-4.5V comes out ahead, 49 to 36 on our weighted score, though Qwen-VL OCR is 20% cheaper per token.
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen-VL OCR
36/100- ECI—
- Price$0.72 / $0.72
- Context34K
- Our pick
Z.ai (Zhipu)GLM-4.5V
49/100- ECI—
- Price$0.60 / $1.80
- Context64K
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
GLM-4.5V is our pick
GLM-4.5V is the better all-round choice, scoring 49/100 against Qwen-VL OCR (36). It leads on inputs & features and context window. Qwen-VL OCR 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 priceQwen-VL OCRQwen-VL OCR $0.72 · GLM-4.5V $0.90 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextGLM-4.5VGLM-4.5V 64,000 · Qwen-VL OCR 34,096 tokens
- Widest inputsGLM-4.5VQwen-VL OCR: Text, Images · GLM-4.5V: Text, Images, Video
- Self-hostingGLM-4.5VPublishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | Qwen-VL OCR | GLM-4.5V |
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 57 | 52 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 25 | 70 |
| Context window | 20% | 1 | 12 |
| Overall | 100% | 36/100 | 49/100 |
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 | Qwen-VL OCRAlibaba (Qwen) | GLM-4.5VZ.ai (Zhipu) |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $0.72 | $0.60 (best) |
| Output | $0.72 (best) | $1.80 |
| Cached input | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.72 (best) | $0.90 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Alibaba API | Official Z.AI API |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 34,096 tokens | 64,000 tokens (best) |
| Max output | 4,096 tokens | 16,384 tokens (best) |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | Yes |
| PDFs | No | No |
| Audio | No | No |
| Video | No | Yes |
| Reasoning | No | Yes |
| Tool calling | No | Yes |
| Structured output | No | No |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| API model ID | qwen-vl-ocr | glm-4.5v |
| API providers | 1 | 11 (best) |
| Released | Oct 28, 2024 | Aug 11, 2025 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Apr 2024 | 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.
- Qwen-VL OCR$8.64
- GLM-4.5V$9.60
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Qwen-VL OCR or GLM-4.5V?
GLM-4.5V is the better all-round choice, scoring 49/100 against Qwen-VL OCR (36). It leads on inputs & features and context window. Qwen-VL OCR 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, Qwen-VL OCR or GLM-4.5V?
Qwen-VL OCR is cheaper at $0.72 input / $0.72 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). GLM-4.5V costs $0.60 input / $1.80 output per million tokens (official Z.AI API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.72 per million tokens for Qwen-VL OCR versus $0.90 for GLM-4.5V (1.3× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. Qwen-VL OCR has not been scored yet and GLM-4.5V has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Qwen-VL OCR and GLM-4.5V yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Note that Qwen-VL OCR does not support tool calling, which most coding agents need.
Which has the bigger context window?
GLM-4.5V has the largest context window at 64,000 tokens, against 34,096 for Qwen-VL OCR. Maximum output per response: Qwen-VL OCR up to 4,096, GLM-4.5V up to 16,384 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Qwen-VL OCR accepts text and images; GLM-4.5V accepts text, images and video. GLM-4.5V handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
GLM-4.5V publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Qwen-VL OCR is proprietary.
Which is newer?
GLM-4.5V is the newest, released Aug 11, 2025. Qwen-VL OCR came out Oct 28, 2024. Knowledge cutoff: Qwen-VL OCR Apr 2024, GLM-4.5V 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
- Add Aya Expanse 32BThree-way comparison
- Qwen-VL OCR vs Aya Expanse 32BCohere
- Qwen-VL OCR vs Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B InstructNVIDIA
- Qwen-VL OCR vs CodestralMistral AI
- Qwen-VL OCR vs Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-InstructMeta
- GLM-4.5V vs Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B InstructAlibaba (Qwen)
- GLM-4.5V vs Mistral Medium 3.1Mistral AI
