Qwen3.5 35B-A3B vs DeepSeek OCR 2 vs GLM-4.7
Qwen3.5 35B-A3B comes out ahead, 63 to 42 and 32 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.
- Our pick
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen3.5 35B-A3B
63/100- ECI142.5
- Price$0.25 / $2.00
- Context262K
DeepSeekDeepSeek OCR 2
32/100- ECI—
- Price$0.89 / $1.47
- Context8K
Z.ai (Zhipu)GLM-4.7
42/100- ECI143.5
- Price$0.60 / $2.20
- Context205K
Qwen3.5 35B-A3B is our pick
Qwen3.5 35B-A3B is the better all-round choice, scoring 63/100 against GLM-4.7 (42) and DeepSeek OCR 2 (32). It leads on price, inputs & features 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 priceQwen3.5 35B-A3BQwen3.5 35B-A3B $0.688 · GLM-4.7 $1.00 · DeepSeek OCR 2 $1.03 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextQwen3.5 35B-A3BQwen3.5 35B-A3B 262,144 · GLM-4.7 204,800 · DeepSeek OCR 2 8,192 tokens
- Widest inputsQwen3.5 35B-A3BQwen3.5 35B-A3B: Text, Images, Audio, Video · DeepSeek OCR 2: Text, Images · GLM-4.7: Text
- Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
| Measure | Weight | Qwen3.5 35B-A3B | DeepSeek OCR 2 | GLM-4.7 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 58 | 49 | 50 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 90 | 25 | 35 |
| Context window | 20% | 37 | 0 | 32 |
| Overall | 100% | 63/100 | 32/100 | 42/100 |
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 | Qwen3.5 35B-A3BAlibaba (Qwen) | DeepSeek OCR 2DeepSeek | GLM-4.7Z.ai (Zhipu) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | 142.5 | — | 143.5 (best) |
| ECI rank | #88 of 148 | — | #84 of 148 (best) |
| GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions | 83.5% (best) | — | 83.3% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics | 70.0% | — | 83.3% (best) |
| SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions | — | — | 32.2% |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $0.25 (best) | $0.89 | $0.60 |
| Output | $2.00 | $1.47 (best) | $2.20 |
| Cached input | — | — | $0.11 |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.688 (best) | $1.03 | $1.00 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Alibaba API | Median of 1 providers | Official Z.AI API |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 262,144 tokens (best) | 8,192 tokens | 204,800 tokens |
| Max output | 65,536 tokens | 8,192 tokens | 131,072 tokens (best) |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | Yes | No |
| PDFs | No | No | No |
| Audio | Yes | No | No |
| Video | Yes | No | No |
| Reasoning | Yes | No | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | No | Yes |
| Structured output | Yes | No | No |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Open | Open | Open |
| API model ID | qwen3.5-35b-a3b | — | glm-4.7 |
| API providers | 18 | 2 | 20 (best) |
| Released | Feb 23, 2026 | Jan 27, 2026 | Dec 22, 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.
- Qwen3.5 35B-A3B$6.50
- DeepSeek OCR 2$11.83
- GLM-4.7$10.40
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Qwen3.5 35B-A3B, DeepSeek OCR 2 or GLM-4.7?
Qwen3.5 35B-A3B is the better all-round choice, scoring 63/100 against GLM-4.7 (42) and DeepSeek OCR 2 (32). It leads on price, inputs & features 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, Qwen3.5 35B-A3B, DeepSeek OCR 2 or GLM-4.7?
Qwen3.5 35B-A3B is cheaper at $0.25 input / $2.00 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). GLM-4.7 costs $0.60 input / $2.20 output per million tokens (official Z.AI API price); DeepSeek OCR 2 costs $0.89 input / $1.47 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.688 per million tokens for Qwen3.5 35B-A3B versus $1.00 for GLM-4.7 (1.5× as much) and $1.03 for DeepSeek OCR 2 (1.5× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Qwen3.5 35B-A3B has an ECI of 142.5, DeepSeek OCR 2 has not been scored yet and GLM-4.7 has an ECI of 143.5.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Qwen3.5 35B-A3B, DeepSeek OCR 2 and GLM-4.7 yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Note that DeepSeek OCR 2 does not support tool calling, which most coding agents need.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen3.5 35B-A3B has the largest context window at 262,144 tokens, against 204,800 for GLM-4.7 and 8,192 for DeepSeek OCR 2. Maximum output per response: Qwen3.5 35B-A3B up to 65,536, DeepSeek OCR 2 up to 8,192, GLM-4.7 up to 131,072 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Qwen3.5 35B-A3B accepts text, images, audio and video; DeepSeek OCR 2 accepts text and images; GLM-4.7 accepts text. Qwen3.5 35B-A3B handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
Yes, all three publish their weights, so you can self-host them.
Which is newer?
Qwen3.5 35B-A3B is the newest, released Feb 23, 2026. DeepSeek OCR 2 came out Jan 27, 2026; GLM-4.7 came out Dec 22, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: GLM-4.7 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.
