ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Nov 2, 2026

Qwen3 Omni 30B A3B Thinking vs GLM-4.7

Qwen3 Omni 30B A3B Thinking comes out ahead, 59 to 41 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. Our pick

    Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3 Omni 30B A3B Thinking

    Released Sep 22, 2025

    59/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.25 / $0.97
    • Context66K
    Full specs Remove Qwen3 Omni 30B A3B Thinking

  2. Z.ai (Zhipu)

    GLM-4.7

    Released Dec 22, 2025

    41/100
    • ECI143.7
    • Price$0.60 / $2.20
    • Context205K
    Full specs Remove GLM-4.7

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

Qwen3 Omni 30B A3B Thinking is our pick

Qwen3 Omni 30B A3B Thinking is the better all-round choice, scoring 59/100 against GLM-4.7 (41). It leads on price and inputs & features. GLM-4.7 wins on 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 Omni 30B A3B ThinkingQwen3 Omni 30B A3B Thinking $0.43 · GLM-4.7 $1.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextGLM-4.7GLM-4.7 204,800 · Qwen3 Omni 30B A3B Thinking 65,536 tokens
  • Widest inputsQwen3 Omni 30B A3B ThinkingQwen3 Omni 30B A3B Thinking: Text, Images, Audio, Video · GLM-4.7: Text
  • Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
How the score is built
MeasureWeightQwen3 Omni 30B A3B ThinkingGLM-4.7
Price50%6448
Inputs & features30%8035
Context window20%1232
Overall100%59/10041/100

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 Omni 30B A3B Thinking vs GLM-4.7 specifications side by side
SpecificationQwen3 Omni 30B A3B ThinkingAlibaba (Qwen)GLM-4.7Z.ai (Zhipu)
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)—143.7
ECI rank—#94 of 165
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions—83.3%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics—83.3%
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions—32.2%
Price per million tokens
Input$0.25 (best)$0.60
Output$0.97 (best)$2.20
Cached input—$0.11
Blended (3:1)$0.43 (best)$1.00
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceMedian of 1 providersOfficial Z.AI API
Limits
Context window65,536 tokens204,800 tokens (best)
Max output16,384 tokens131,072 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesYesNo
PDFsNoNo
AudioYesNo
VideoYesNo
ReasoningYesYes
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputNoNo
Availability
WeightsOpenApache-2.0Open
API model ID—glm-4.7
API providers131 (best)
ReleasedSep 22, 2025Dec 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 Omni 30B A3B Thinking$4.44
  • GLM-4.7$10.40
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Qwen3 Omni 30B A3B Thinking or GLM-4.7?

Qwen3 Omni 30B A3B Thinking is the better all-round choice, scoring 59/100 against GLM-4.7 (41). It leads on price and inputs & features. GLM-4.7 wins on 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 Omni 30B A3B Thinking or GLM-4.7?

Qwen3 Omni 30B A3B Thinking is cheaper at $0.25 input / $0.97 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider). 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 $0.43 per million tokens for Qwen3 Omni 30B A3B Thinking versus $1.00 for GLM-4.7 (2.3× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. Qwen3 Omni 30B A3B Thinking has not been scored yet and GLM-4.7 has an ECI of 143.7.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Qwen3 Omni 30B A3B Thinking and GLM-4.7 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 has the largest context window at 204,800 tokens, against 65,536 for Qwen3 Omni 30B A3B Thinking. Maximum output per response: Qwen3 Omni 30B A3B Thinking up to 16,384, GLM-4.7 up to 131,072 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Qwen3 Omni 30B A3B Thinking accepts text, images, audio and video; GLM-4.7 accepts text. Qwen3 Omni 30B A3B Thinking handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Yes, both publish their weights (Apache-2.0), so you can self-host them.

Which is newer?

GLM-4.7 is the newest, released Dec 22, 2025. Qwen3 Omni 30B A3B Thinking came out Sep 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 Nov 2, 2026.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons