ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Step 3.5 Flash vs GLM-4.7-FlashX

Too close to call on our weighted score (Step 3.5 Flash 62, GLM-4.7-FlashX 61). The right pick depends on what you value most.

  1. StepFun

    Step 3.5 Flash

    Released Jan 29, 2026

    62/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.10 / $0.30
    • Context256K
    Full specs Remove Step 3.5 Flash

  2. 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

Too close to call

It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 1 points (Step 3.5 Flash 62/100, GLM-4.7-FlashX 61/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Step 3.5 Flash on price and Step 3.5 Flash for long inputs. 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 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextStep 3.5 FlashStep 3.5 Flash 256,000 · GLM-4.7-FlashX 200,000 tokens
  • Widest inputsSame inputsStep 3.5 Flash: 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
MeasureWeightStep 3.5 FlashGLM-4.7-FlashX
Price50%8989
Inputs & features30%3535
Context window20%3632
Overall100%62/10061/100

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 GLM-4.7-FlashX specifications side by side
SpecificationStep 3.5 FlashStepFunGLM-4.7-FlashXZ.ai (Zhipu)
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)——
ECI rank——
Price per million tokens
Input$0.10$0.07 (best)
Output$0.30 (best)$0.40
Cached input$0.02$0.01 (best)
Blended (3:1)$0.15 (best)$0.152
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceOfficial StepFun (Global) APIOfficial Z.AI API
Limits
Context window256,000 tokens (best)200,000 tokens
Max output256,000 tokens (best)131,072 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesNoNo
PDFsNoNo
AudioNoNo
VideoNoNo
ReasoningYeslow · highYes
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputNoNo
Availability
WeightsOpenOpen
API model IDstep-3.5-flashglm-4.7-flashx
API providers88
ReleasedJan 29, 2026Jan 19, 2026
Knowledge cutoffJan 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
  • GLM-4.7-FlashX$1.50
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Step 3.5 Flash or GLM-4.7-FlashX?

It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 1 points (Step 3.5 Flash 62/100, GLM-4.7-FlashX 61/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Step 3.5 Flash on price and Step 3.5 Flash for long inputs. 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 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). 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).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. Step 3.5 Flash 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 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?

Step 3.5 Flash has the largest context window at 256,000 tokens, against 200,000 for GLM-4.7-FlashX. Maximum output per response: Step 3.5 Flash up to 256,000, GLM-4.7-FlashX up to 131,072 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Step 3.5 Flash 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?

Step 3.5 Flash is the newest, released Jan 29, 2026. GLM-4.7-FlashX came out Jan 19, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: Step 3.5 Flash 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.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons