ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Step 3.5 Flash vs Mistral Small 3.2 vs GLM-4.7-FlashX

Too close to call on our weighted score (Mistral Small 3.2 64, 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. Mistral AI

    Mistral Small 3.2

    Released Jun 20, 2025

    64/100
    • ECI131.7
    • Price$0.10 / $0.30
    • Context128K
    Full specs Remove Mistral Small 3.2

  3. 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
01 — Verdict

Too close to call

It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 2 points (Mistral Small 3.2 64/100, 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 Flash and Mistral Small 3.2Step 3.5 Flash $0.15 · Mistral Small 3.2 $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 · Mistral Small 3.2 128,000 tokens
  • Widest inputsMistral Small 3.2Step 3.5 Flash: Text · Mistral Small 3.2: Text, Images · 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 FlashMistral Small 3.2GLM-4.7-FlashX
Price50%898989
Inputs & features30%355035
Context window20%362432
Overall100%62/10064/10061/100

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 Mistral Small 3.2 vs GLM-4.7-FlashX specifications side by side
SpecificationStep 3.5 FlashStepFunMistral Small 3.2Mistral AIGLM-4.7-FlashXZ.ai (Zhipu)
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)—131.7—
ECI rank—#123 of 148—
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions—49.1%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics—30.3%—
Price per million tokens
Input$0.10$0.10$0.07 (best)
Output$0.30 (best)$0.30 (best)$0.40
Cached input$0.02—$0.01 (best)
Blended (3:1)$0.15 (best)$0.15 (best)$0.152
Long-context rateSame rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceOfficial StepFun (Global) APIOfficial Mistral APIOfficial Z.AI API
Limits
Context window256,000 tokens (best)128,000 tokens200,000 tokens
Max output256,000 tokens (best)16,384 tokens131,072 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesNoYesNo
PDFsNoNoNo
AudioNoNoNo
VideoNoNoNo
ReasoningYeslow · highNoYes
Tool callingYesYesYes
Structured outputNoNoNo
Availability
WeightsOpenOpenOpen
API model IDstep-3.5-flashmistral-small-2506glm-4.7-flashx
API providers8 (best)68 (best)
ReleasedJan 29, 2026Jun 20, 2025Jan 19, 2026
Knowledge cutoffJan 2025Mar 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
  • Mistral Small 3.2$1.60
  • GLM-4.7-FlashX$1.50
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Step 3.5 Flash, Mistral Small 3.2 or GLM-4.7-FlashX?

It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 2 points (Mistral Small 3.2 64/100, 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, Mistral Small 3.2 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). Mistral Small 3.2 costs $0.10 input / $0.30 output per million tokens (official Mistral 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 $0.15 for Mistral Small 3.2 (1× as much) and $0.152 for GLM-4.7-FlashX (1× 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, Mistral Small 3.2 has an ECI of 131.7 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, Mistral Small 3.2 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?

Step 3.5 Flash has the largest context window at 256,000 tokens, against 200,000 for GLM-4.7-FlashX and 128,000 for Mistral Small 3.2. Maximum output per response: Step 3.5 Flash up to 256,000, Mistral Small 3.2 up to 16,384, GLM-4.7-FlashX up to 131,072 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Step 3.5 Flash accepts text; Mistral Small 3.2 accepts text and images; GLM-4.7-FlashX accepts text. Mistral Small 3.2 handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Yes, all three 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; Mistral Small 3.2 came out Jun 20, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Step 3.5 Flash Jan 2025, Mistral Small 3.2 Mar 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