ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Step 3.5 Flash vs Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite vs GLM-4.7-FlashX

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite comes out ahead, 73 to 62 and 61 on our weighted score, though Step 3.5 Flash is 3.8× cheaper per token.

  1. StepFun

    Step 3.5 Flash

    Released Jan 29, 2026

    62/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.10 / $0.30
    • Context256K
  2. Our pick

    Google

    Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite

    Released May 7, 2026

    73/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.25 / $1.50
    • Context1.05M
  3. Z.ai (Zhipu)

    GLM-4.7-FlashX

    Released Jan 19, 2026

    61/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.07 / $0.40
    • Context200K
01 — Verdict

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite is our pick

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite is the better all-round choice, scoring 73/100 against Step 3.5 Flash (62) and GLM-4.7-FlashX (61). It leads on 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 priceStep 3.5 FlashStep 3.5 Flash $0.15 · GLM-4.7-FlashX $0.152 · Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite $0.563 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextGemini 3.1 Flash LiteGemini 3.1 Flash Lite 1,048,576 · Step 3.5 Flash 256,000 · GLM-4.7-FlashX 200,000 tokens
  • Widest inputsGemini 3.1 Flash LiteStep 3.5 Flash: Text · Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: Text, Images, PDFs, Audio, Video · GLM-4.7-FlashX: Text
  • Self-hostingStep 3.5 Flash and GLM-4.7-FlashXPublishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightStep 3.5 FlashGemini 3.1 Flash LiteGLM-4.7-FlashX
Price50%896289
Inputs & features30%3510035
Context window20%366132
Overall100%62/10073/10061/100

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.

Step 3.5 Flash vs Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite vs GLM-4.7-FlashX specifications side by side
SpecificationStep 3.5 FlashStepFunGemini 3.1 Flash LiteGoogleGLM-4.7-FlashXZ.ai (Zhipu)
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)———
ECI rank———
Price per million tokens
Input$0.10$0.25$0.07 (best)
Output$0.30 (best)$1.50$0.40
Cached input$0.02$0.025$0.01 (best)
Blended (3:1)$0.15 (best)$0.563$0.152
Long-context rateSame rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceOfficial StepFun (Global) APIOfficial Google APIOfficial Z.AI API
Limits
Context window256,000 tokens1,048,576 tokens (best)200,000 tokens
Max output256,000 tokens (best)65,536 tokens131,072 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesNoYesNo
PDFsNoYesNo
AudioNoYesNo
VideoNoYesNo
ReasoningYeslow · highYesminimal · low · medium · highYes
Tool callingYesYesYes
Structured outputNoYesNo
Availability
WeightsOpenProprietaryOpen
API model IDstep-3.5-flashgemini-3.1-flash-liteglm-4.7-flashx
API providers823 (best)8
ReleasedJan 29, 2026May 7, 2026Jan 19, 2026
Knowledge cutoffJan 2025Jan 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.

  • Step 3.5 Flash$1.60
  • Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite$5.50
  • GLM-4.7-FlashX$1.50
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Step 3.5 Flash, Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite or GLM-4.7-FlashX?

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite is the better all-round choice, scoring 73/100 against Step 3.5 Flash (62) and GLM-4.7-FlashX (61). It leads on 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, Step 3.5 Flash, Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite or GLM-4.7-FlashX?

Step 3.5 Flash is cheaper at $0.10 input / $0.30 output per million tokens (official StepFun (Global) API price). GLM-4.7-FlashX costs $0.07 input / $0.40 output per million tokens (official Z.AI API price); Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite costs $0.25 input / $1.50 output per million tokens (official Google API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.15 per million tokens for Step 3.5 Flash versus $0.152 for GLM-4.7-FlashX (1× as much) and $0.563 for Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite (3.8× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Step 3.5 Flash has not been scored yet, Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite 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 Step 3.5 Flash, Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite and GLM-4.7-FlashX 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?

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite has the largest context window at 1,048,576 tokens, against 256,000 for Step 3.5 Flash and 200,000 for GLM-4.7-FlashX. Maximum output per response: Step 3.5 Flash up to 256,000, Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite up to 65,536, GLM-4.7-FlashX up to 131,072 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Step 3.5 Flash accepts text; Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite accepts text, images, PDFs, audio and video; GLM-4.7-FlashX accepts text. Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Step 3.5 Flash and GLM-4.7-FlashX publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite is the newest, released May 7, 2026. Step 3.5 Flash came out Jan 29, 2026; GLM-4.7-FlashX came out Jan 19, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: Step 3.5 Flash Jan 2025, Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Jan 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.