ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Qwen3.5 35B-A3B vs Seed 2.0 Code vs GLM-4.7

Qwen3.5 35B-A3B comes out ahead, 63 to 57 and 42 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. Our pick

    Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3.5 35B-A3B

    Released Feb 23, 2026

    63/100
    • ECI142.5
    • Price$0.25 / $2.00
    • Context262K
  2. ByteDance Seed

    Seed 2.0 Code

    Released Feb 14, 2026

    57/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.475 / $2.37
    • Context262K
  3. Z.ai (Zhipu)

    GLM-4.7

    Released Dec 22, 2025

    42/100
    • ECI143.5
    • Price$0.60 / $2.20
    • Context205K
01 — Verdict

Qwen3.5 35B-A3B is our pick

Qwen3.5 35B-A3B is the better all-round choice, scoring 63/100 against Seed 2.0 Code (57) and GLM-4.7 (42). It leads on price and inputs & features. 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 · Seed 2.0 Code $0.95 · GLM-4.7 $1.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextQwen3.5 35B-A3B and Seed 2.0 CodeQwen3.5 35B-A3B 262,144 · Seed 2.0 Code 262,144 · GLM-4.7 204,800 tokens
  • Widest inputsQwen3.5 35B-A3BQwen3.5 35B-A3B: Text, Images, Audio, Video · Seed 2.0 Code: Text, Images, Video · GLM-4.7: Text
  • Self-hostingQwen3.5 35B-A3B and GLM-4.7Publishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightQwen3.5 35B-A3BSeed 2.0 CodeGLM-4.7
Price50%585150
Inputs & features30%908035
Context window20%373732
Overall100%63/10057/10042/100

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.

Qwen3.5 35B-A3B vs Seed 2.0 Code vs GLM-4.7 specifications side by side
SpecificationQwen3.5 35B-A3BAlibaba (Qwen)Seed 2.0 CodeByteDance SeedGLM-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 questions83.5% (best)—83.3%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics70.0%—83.3% (best)
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions——32.2%
Price per million tokens
Input$0.25 (best)$0.475$0.60
Output$2.00 (best)$2.37$2.20
Cached input—$0.095 (best)$0.11
Blended (3:1)$0.688 (best)$0.95$1.00
Long-context rateSame rateOver 32K: $0.712 / $3.56Same rate
Price sourceOfficial Alibaba APIOfficial Volcengine Ark APIOfficial Z.AI API
Limits
Context window262,144 tokens (best)262,144 tokens (best)204,800 tokens
Max output65,536 tokens131,072 tokens (best)131,072 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesYesYesNo
PDFsNoNoNo
AudioYesNoNo
VideoYesYesNo
ReasoningYesYesminimal · low · medium · high · xhigh · maxYes
Tool callingYesYesYes
Structured outputYesYesNo
Availability
WeightsOpenProprietaryOpen
API model IDqwen3.5-35b-a3bdoubao-seed-2-0-code-preview-260215glm-4.7
API providers181020 (best)
ReleasedFeb 23, 2026Feb 14, 2026Dec 22, 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.

  • Qwen3.5 35B-A3B$6.50
  • Seed 2.0 Code$9.50
  • GLM-4.7$10.40
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Qwen3.5 35B-A3B, Seed 2.0 Code or GLM-4.7?

Qwen3.5 35B-A3B is the better all-round choice, scoring 63/100 against Seed 2.0 Code (57) and GLM-4.7 (42). It leads on price and inputs & features. 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, Seed 2.0 Code or GLM-4.7?

Qwen3.5 35B-A3B is cheaper at $0.25 input / $2.00 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). Seed 2.0 Code costs $0.475 input / $2.37 output per million tokens (official Volcengine Ark API price); GLM-4.7 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 $0.688 per million tokens for Qwen3.5 35B-A3B versus $0.95 for Seed 2.0 Code (1.4× as much) and $1.00 for GLM-4.7 (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, Seed 2.0 Code 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, Seed 2.0 Code and GLM-4.7 yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. All three support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.5 35B-A3B and Seed 2.0 Code have the largest context windows (262,144 and 262,144 tokens), against 204,800 for GLM-4.7. Maximum output per response: Qwen3.5 35B-A3B up to 65,536, Seed 2.0 Code up to 131,072, 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; Seed 2.0 Code accepts text, images and video; GLM-4.7 accepts text. Qwen3.5 35B-A3B handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Qwen3.5 35B-A3B and GLM-4.7 publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Seed 2.0 Code is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Qwen3.5 35B-A3B is the newest, released Feb 23, 2026. Seed 2.0 Code came out Feb 14, 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.