ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Qwen3.5 397B-A17B vs Gemini Robotics-ER 1.6 Preview vs GLM-5

Qwen3.5 397B-A17B comes out ahead, 56 to 50 and 37 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. Our pick

    Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3.5 397B-A17B

    Released Feb 15, 2026

    56/100
    • ECI146.7
    • Price$0.60 / $3.60
    • Context262K
  2. Google

    Gemini Robotics-ER 1.6 Preview

    Released Apr 14, 2026

    50/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$1.00 / $5.00
    • Context131K
  3. Z.ai (Zhipu)

    GLM-5

    Released Feb 12, 2026

    37/100
    • ECI145.8
    • Price$1.00 / $3.20
    • Context205K
01 — Verdict

Qwen3.5 397B-A17B is our pick

Qwen3.5 397B-A17B is the better all-round choice, scoring 56/100 against Gemini Robotics-ER 1.6 Preview (50) and GLM-5 (37). 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 priceQwen3.5 397B-A17BQwen3.5 397B-A17B $1.35 · GLM-5 $1.55 · Gemini Robotics-ER 1.6 Preview $2.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextQwen3.5 397B-A17BQwen3.5 397B-A17B 262,144 · GLM-5 204,800 · Gemini Robotics-ER 1.6 Preview 131,072 tokens
  • Widest inputsQwen3.5 397B-A17B and Gemini Robotics-ER 1.6 PreviewQwen3.5 397B-A17B: Text, Images, Audio, Video · Gemini Robotics-ER 1.6 Preview: Text, Images, Audio, Video · GLM-5: Text
  • Self-hostingQwen3.5 397B-A17B and GLM-5Publishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightQwen3.5 397B-A17BGemini Robotics-ER 1.6 PreviewGLM-5
Price50%443641
Inputs & features30%909035
Context window20%372432
Overall100%56/10050/10037/100

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 397B-A17B vs Gemini Robotics-ER 1.6 Preview vs GLM-5 specifications side by side
SpecificationQwen3.5 397B-A17BAlibaba (Qwen)Gemini Robotics-ER 1.6 PreviewGoogleGLM-5Z.ai (Zhipu)
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)146.7 (best)—145.8
ECI rank#67 of 148 (best)—#74 of 148
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions86.4%—87.8% (best)
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics31.2%——
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics88.9% (best)—80.0%
SWE-bench VerifiedFixing real GitHub issues——72.1%
Price per million tokens
Input$0.60 (best)$1.00$1.00
Output$3.60$5.00$3.20 (best)
Cached input——$0.20
Blended (3:1)$1.35 (best)$2.00$1.55
Long-context rateSame rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceOfficial Alibaba APIMedian of 1 providersOfficial Z.AI API
Limits
Context window262,144 tokens (best)131,072 tokens204,800 tokens
Max output65,536 tokens65,536 tokens131,072 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesYesYesNo
PDFsNoNoNo
AudioYesYesNo
VideoYesYesNo
ReasoningYesYesYes
Tool callingYesYesYes
Structured outputYesYesNo
Availability
WeightsOpenProprietaryOpen
API model IDqwen3.5-397b-a17b—glm-5
API providers23127 (best)
ReleasedFeb 15, 2026Apr 14, 2026Feb 12, 2026
Knowledge cutoff—Jan 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 397B-A17B$13.20
  • Gemini Robotics-ER 1.6 Preview$20.00
  • GLM-5$16.40
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Qwen3.5 397B-A17B, Gemini Robotics-ER 1.6 Preview or GLM-5?

Qwen3.5 397B-A17B is the better all-round choice, scoring 56/100 against Gemini Robotics-ER 1.6 Preview (50) and GLM-5 (37). 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, Qwen3.5 397B-A17B, Gemini Robotics-ER 1.6 Preview or GLM-5?

Qwen3.5 397B-A17B is cheaper at $0.60 input / $3.60 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). GLM-5 costs $1.00 input / $3.20 output per million tokens (official Z.AI API price); Gemini Robotics-ER 1.6 Preview costs $1.00 input / $5.00 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $1.35 per million tokens for Qwen3.5 397B-A17B versus $1.55 for GLM-5 (1.1× as much) and $2.00 for Gemini Robotics-ER 1.6 Preview (1.5× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Qwen3.5 397B-A17B has an ECI of 146.7, Gemini Robotics-ER 1.6 Preview has not been scored yet and GLM-5 has an ECI of 145.8.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Qwen3.5 397B-A17B and Gemini Robotics-ER 1.6 Preview 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 397B-A17B has the largest context window at 262,144 tokens, against 204,800 for GLM-5 and 131,072 for Gemini Robotics-ER 1.6 Preview. Maximum output per response: Qwen3.5 397B-A17B up to 65,536, Gemini Robotics-ER 1.6 Preview up to 65,536, GLM-5 up to 131,072 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Qwen3.5 397B-A17B accepts text, images, audio and video; Gemini Robotics-ER 1.6 Preview accepts text, images, audio and video; GLM-5 accepts text. Qwen3.5 397B-A17B handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Qwen3.5 397B-A17B and GLM-5 publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Gemini Robotics-ER 1.6 Preview is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Gemini Robotics-ER 1.6 Preview is the newest, released Apr 14, 2026. Qwen3.5 397B-A17B came out Feb 15, 2026; GLM-5 came out Feb 12, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: Gemini Robotics-ER 1.6 Preview Jan 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.