Qwen3.7 Max vs GLM-5.3
GLM-5.3 comes out ahead, 64 to 58 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen3.7 Max
58/100- ECI153.7
- Price$2.50 / $7.50
- Context1M
- Our pick
Z.ai (Zhipu)GLM-5.3
64/100- ECI155.8
- Price$1.40 / $4.40
- Context1M
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
GLM-5.3 is our pick
GLM-5.3 is the better all-round choice, scoring 64/100 against Qwen3.7 Max (58). It leads on capability, price and inputs & features. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
- CapabilityGLM-5.3Capabilities Index (ECI): GLM-5.3 155.8 · Qwen3.7 Max 153.7
- Lowest priceGLM-5.3GLM-5.3 $2.15 · Qwen3.7 Max $3.75 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextAbout the sameQwen3.7 Max 1,000,000 · GLM-5.3 1,000,000 tokens
- Widest inputsSame inputsQwen3.7 Max: Text · GLM-5.3: Text
- Self-hostingGLM-5.3Publishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | Qwen3.7 Max | GLM-5.3 |
|---|---|---|---|
| CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI) | 50% | 83 | 85 |
| Price | 25% | 23 | 34 |
| Inputs & features | 15% | 35 | 45 |
| Context window | 10% | 60 | 60 |
| Overall | 100% | 58/100 | 64/100 |
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | Qwen3.7 MaxAlibaba (Qwen) | GLM-5.3Z.ai (Zhipu) |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | 153.7 | 155.8 (best) |
| ECI rank | #37 of 148 | #24 of 148 (best) |
| GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions | 90.9% | 90.9% |
| FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics | 64.6% | 68.8% (best) |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics | 95.6% (best) | 91.1% |
| SWE-bench VerifiedFixing real GitHub issues | 77.3% | — |
| SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions | 55.8% (best) | 41.0% |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $2.50 | $1.40 (best) |
| Output | $7.50 | $4.40 (best) |
| Cached input | $0.50 | $0.26 (best) |
| Blended (3:1) | $3.75 | $2.15 (best) |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Alibaba API | Official Z.AI API |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 1,000,000 tokens | 1,000,000 tokens |
| Max output | 65,536 tokens | 131,072 tokens (best) |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | No |
| PDFs | No | No |
| Audio | No | No |
| Video | No | No |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yeslow · high · max |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | Yes |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| API model ID | qwen3.7-max | glm-5.3 |
| API providers | 26 | 62 (best) |
| Released | May 21, 2026 | Aug 14, 2026 |
| Knowledge cutoff | — | — |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- Qwen3.7 Max$40.00
- GLM-5.3$22.80
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Qwen3.7 Max or GLM-5.3?
GLM-5.3 is the better all-round choice, scoring 64/100 against Qwen3.7 Max (58). It leads on capability, price and inputs & features. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
Which is cheaper, Qwen3.7 Max or GLM-5.3?
GLM-5.3 is cheaper at $1.40 input / $4.40 output per million tokens (official Z.AI API price). Qwen3.7 Max costs $2.50 input / $7.50 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $2.15 per million tokens for GLM-5.3 versus $3.75 for Qwen3.7 Max (1.7× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
GLM-5.3 scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): GLM-5.3 155.8 (#24 of 148) and Qwen3.7 Max 153.7 (#37 of 148). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (153.7–158.3 vs 151.9–156.0), so treat the gap as small. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — Qwen3.7 Max 90.9%, GLM-5.3 90.9%; FrontierMath Tiers 1–3 — GLM-5.3 68.8%, Qwen3.7 Max 64.6%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — Qwen3.7 Max 95.6%, GLM-5.3 91.1%; SimpleQA Verified — Qwen3.7 Max 55.8%, GLM-5.3 41.0%.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for GLM-5.3 yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, GLM-5.3 leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen3.7 Max and GLM-5.3 share the same 1,000,000-token context window. Maximum output per response: Qwen3.7 Max up to 65,536, GLM-5.3 up to 131,072 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Qwen3.7 Max accepts text; GLM-5.3 accepts text. They handle the same number of input types.
Are any of these open source?
GLM-5.3 publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Qwen3.7 Max is proprietary.
Which is newer?
GLM-5.3 is the newest, released Aug 14, 2026. Qwen3.7 Max came out May 21, 2026.
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.
