ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct vs GLM-4.7-FlashX

GLM-4.7-FlashX comes out ahead, 61 to 39 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct

    Released Sep 2025

    39/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.50 / $2.00
    • Context131K
    Full specs Remove Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct
  2. Our pick

    Z.ai (Zhipu)

    GLM-4.7-FlashX

    Released Jan 19, 2026

    61/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.07 / $0.40
    • Context200K
    Full specs Remove GLM-4.7-FlashX

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

GLM-4.7-FlashX is our pick

GLM-4.7-FlashX is the better all-round choice, scoring 61/100 against Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct (39). 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 priceGLM-4.7-FlashXGLM-4.7-FlashX $0.152 · Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct $0.875 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextGLM-4.7-FlashXGLM-4.7-FlashX 200,000 · Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct 131,072 tokens
  • Widest inputsSame inputsQwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct: Text · GLM-4.7-FlashX: Text
  • Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
How the score is built
MeasureWeightQwen3-Next 80B-A3B InstructGLM-4.7-FlashX
Price50%5389
Inputs & features30%2535
Context window20%2432
Overall100%39/10061/100

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-Next 80B-A3B Instruct vs GLM-4.7-FlashX specifications side by side
SpecificationQwen3-Next 80B-A3B InstructAlibaba (Qwen)GLM-4.7-FlashXZ.ai (Zhipu)
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)——
ECI rank——
Price per million tokens
Input$0.50$0.07 (best)
Output$2.00$0.40 (best)
Cached input—$0.01
Blended (3:1)$0.875$0.152 (best)
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceOfficial Alibaba APIOfficial Z.AI API
Limits
Context window131,072 tokens200,000 tokens (best)
Max output32,768 tokens131,072 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesNoNo
PDFsNoNo
AudioNoNo
VideoNoNo
ReasoningNoYes
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputNoNo
Availability
WeightsOpenOpen
API model IDqwen3-next-80b-a3b-instructglm-4.7-flashx
API providers13 (best)8
ReleasedSep 2025Jan 19, 2026
Knowledge cutoffApr 2025Apr 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-Next 80B-A3B Instruct$9.00
  • GLM-4.7-FlashX$1.50
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct or GLM-4.7-FlashX?

GLM-4.7-FlashX is the better all-round choice, scoring 61/100 against Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct (39). 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-Next 80B-A3B Instruct or GLM-4.7-FlashX?

GLM-4.7-FlashX is cheaper at $0.07 input / $0.40 output per million tokens (official Z.AI API price). Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct costs $0.50 input / $2.00 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.152 per million tokens for GLM-4.7-FlashX versus $0.875 for Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct (5.7× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct has not been scored yet and GLM-4.7-FlashX has not been scored yet.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct and GLM-4.7-FlashX yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

GLM-4.7-FlashX has the largest context window at 200,000 tokens, against 131,072 for Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct. Maximum output per response: Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct up to 32,768, GLM-4.7-FlashX up to 131,072 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct accepts text; GLM-4.7-FlashX accepts text. They handle the same number of input types.

Are any of these open source?

Yes, both publish their weights, so you can self-host them.

Which is newer?

GLM-4.7-FlashX is the newest, released Jan 19, 2026. Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct came out Sep 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct Apr 2025, GLM-4.7-FlashX 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.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons