Step 3.5 Flash vs Grok 4.1 Fast vs GLM-4.7-FlashX
Grok 4.1 Fast comes out ahead, 71 to 62 and 61 on our weighted score, though Step 3.5 Flash is 45% cheaper per token.
StepFunStep 3.5 Flash
62/100- ECI—
- Price$0.10 / $0.30
- Context256K
- Our pick
xAIGrok 4.1 Fast
71/100- ECI—
- Price$0.20 / $0.50
- Context2M
Z.ai (Zhipu)GLM-4.7-FlashX
61/100- ECI—
- Price$0.07 / $0.40
- Context200K
Grok 4.1 Fast is our pick
Grok 4.1 Fast is the better all-round choice, scoring 71/100 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 · Grok 4.1 Fast $0.275 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextGrok 4.1 FastGrok 4.1 Fast 2,000,000 · Step 3.5 Flash 256,000 · GLM-4.7-FlashX 200,000 tokens
- Widest inputsGrok 4.1 FastStep 3.5 Flash: Text · Grok 4.1 Fast: Text, Images · GLM-4.7-FlashX: Text
- Self-hostingStep 3.5 Flash and GLM-4.7-FlashXPublishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | Step 3.5 Flash | Grok 4.1 Fast | GLM-4.7-FlashX |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 89 | 76 | 89 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 35 | 60 | 35 |
| Context window | 20% | 36 | 72 | 32 |
| Overall | 100% | 62/100 | 71/100 | 61/100 |
Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | Step 3.5 FlashStepFun | Grok 4.1 FastxAI | GLM-4.7-FlashXZ.ai (Zhipu) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $0.10 | $0.20 | $0.07 (best) |
| Output | $0.30 (best) | $0.50 | $0.40 |
| Cached input | $0.02 | — | $0.01 (best) |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.15 (best) | $0.275 | $0.152 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official StepFun (Global) API | Median of 2 providers | Official Z.AI API |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 256,000 tokens | 2,000,000 tokens (best) | 200,000 tokens |
| Max output | 256,000 tokens (best) | 30,000 tokens | 131,072 tokens |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | Yes | No |
| PDFs | No | No | No |
| Audio | No | No | No |
| Video | No | No | No |
| Reasoning | Yeslow · high | No | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | Yes | No |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Open | Proprietary | Open |
| API model ID | step-3.5-flash | — | glm-4.7-flashx |
| API providers | 8 (best) | 2 | 8 (best) |
| Released | Jan 29, 2026 | Nov 19, 2025 | Jan 19, 2026 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Jan 2025 | — | Apr 2025 |
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
- Grok 4.1 Fast$3.00
- GLM-4.7-FlashX$1.50
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Step 3.5 Flash, Grok 4.1 Fast or GLM-4.7-FlashX?
Grok 4.1 Fast is the better all-round choice, scoring 71/100 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, Grok 4.1 Fast 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); Grok 4.1 Fast costs $0.20 input / $0.50 output per million tokens (median across 2 API providers). 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 $0.275 for Grok 4.1 Fast (1.8× 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, Grok 4.1 Fast 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, Grok 4.1 Fast 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?
Grok 4.1 Fast has the largest context window at 2,000,000 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, Grok 4.1 Fast up to 30,000, GLM-4.7-FlashX up to 131,072 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Step 3.5 Flash accepts text; Grok 4.1 Fast accepts text and images; GLM-4.7-FlashX accepts text. Grok 4.1 Fast 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; Grok 4.1 Fast is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Step 3.5 Flash is the newest, released Jan 29, 2026. GLM-4.7-FlashX came out Jan 19, 2026; Grok 4.1 Fast came out Nov 19, 2025. 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.
