Compare / Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 vs GLM-4.6V
Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 vs GLM-4.6V
Which is cheaper, which is more capable, and which does better at each kind of work, from 16 results on 3 sources that measured both models.
Of the 16 results both models have, the better value on each. Results whose reported ranges overlap are too close to call.
Results as of 9 October 2026 (catalogue release 2026-10-09-dd620e778ac5). See also Alibaba vs Z.ai, every model from both labs.
Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 or GLM-4.6V? The short answer
They score about the same, so pick GLM-4.6V: it costs 2.2 times less per token.
- GLM-4.6V is cheaper: $0.45 against $0.97 per million tokens, 2.2 times less.
- Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 scores higher on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index: 12.7 against 11.2.
- GLM-4.6V is newer: released 8 Dec 2025, against 25 Jul 2025 for Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507.
- On third-party benchmarks, on the results both models have: Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 does better for reasoning and knowledge.
Head to head
Every fact side by side
| Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 | GLM-4.6V | |
|---|---|---|
| Price per million tokens | $0.30 in · $3.00 out | $0.30 in · $0.90 out |
| Blended (3 in : 1 out) | $0.97 | $0.45 |
| Cheapest host, blended | $0.75 (Alibaba) | $0.45 (Novita, BF16) |
| Intelligence Index | 12.7 | 11.2 |
| Spring Prompt overall | – | – |
| Output speed, tokens a second | – | – |
| Context window | 131,072 tokens | 131,072 tokens |
| Released | 25 Jul 2025 | 8 Dec 2025 (newer) |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Developer based in | China | China |
Prices are the developer's list price where we have read it, otherwise the typical host on OpenRouter; see every model's price. Intelligence and speed from Artificial Analysis.
Which is better for what
Each model's rank among the models on sale today, for each kind of work, from our own benchmarks and licensed sources. Further right is better; the better rank is in green.
Every shared result
Each model's best result on every measure both have, grouped by benchmark, with the setting that produced it. Under each measure, every model that benchmark has measured is a grey tick, best to the right, so you can see where the two sit in the field. The headline measures of each benchmark come first; the rest are under "Show all". Green marks the better value; where a source reports ranges that overlap, neither is marked.
| Measure | Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| Arena (formerly LMArena) reported by Arena (formerly LMArena) · 3 results | ||
| Overall · TextArena rating, higher is better 139 · 164 of 387 measured | 1,400 | 1,379 |
| Business, management and finance · TextArena rating, higher is better 133 · 165 of 380 measured | 1,404 | 1,370 |
| Creative writing · TextArena rating, higher is better 133 · 153 of 385 measured | 1,371 | 1,351 |
| Artificial Analysis reported by Artificial Analysis · 3 results | ||
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence Indexindex score, higher is better 147 · 161 of 243 measured | 12.7 | 11.2thinking reasoning |
| GPQA Diamond% of questions, higher is better 114 · 151 of 231 measured | 79.0% | 71.9%thinking reasoning |
| Humanity's Last Exam% of questions, higher is better 122 · 159 of 242 measured | 15.9% | 9.6%thinking reasoning |
| UGI Leaderboard reported by UGI Leaderboard · 3 results | ||
| Writing score · UGIscore out of 100, higher is better 139 · 111 of 230 measured | 32.4 | 39.7thinking reasoning |
| Requested-length error · UGI% off the requested word count, lower is better 166 · 180 of 230 measured | 30.0% | 35.0%thinking reasoning |
| Style adherence · UGIscore from 0 to 1, higher is better 194 · 22 of 230 measured | 0.31 | 0.39no reasoning |
Show all 16 results (7 more)
| Measure | Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| Arena (formerly LMArena) reported by Arena (formerly LMArena) · 3 results | ||
| Expert prompts · TextArena rating, higher is better 85 · 164 of 338 measured | 1,466 | 1,394 |
| Instruction following · TextArena rating, higher is better 142 · 163 of 387 measured | 1,385 | 1,367 |
| Writing, literature and language · TextArena rating, higher is better 139 · 160 of 386 measured | 1,377 | 1,357 |
| Artificial Analysis reported by Artificial Analysis · 4 results | ||
| IFBench% of instructions, higher is better 101 · 181 of 195 measured | 51.2% | 30.1%thinking reasoning |
| Long-context reasoning (AA-LCR)% of questions, higher is better 99 · 158 of 233 measured | 72.0% | 48.7%thinking reasoning |
| Terminal-Bench Hard% of tasks, higher is better 116 · 114 of 190 measured | 13.6% | 14.4%thinking reasoning |
| τ²-bench telecom% of tasks, higher is better 101 · 130 of 193 measured | 53.2% | 31.6%thinking reasoning |
Compare them with other models
Quick answers
Is Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 better than GLM-4.6V?
They score about the same, so pick GLM-4.6V: it costs 2.2 times less per token.
Which is cheaper, Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 or GLM-4.6V?
GLM-4.6V is cheaper: $0.45 against $0.97 per million tokens, 2.2 times less.
Which is better for reasoning and knowledge, Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 or GLM-4.6V?
Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 ranks 117 of 198 models on sale for hard questions across science, maths and general knowledge, against 135 for GLM-4.6V.
Which is better for writing, Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 or GLM-4.6V?
GLM-4.6V ranks 120 of 188 models on sale for what people prefer in blind comparisons, and judged writing quality, against 122 for Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507.
Which is better for sticking to the facts, Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 or GLM-4.6V?
Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 ranks 92 of 152 models on sale for summarising without inventing things, and factual answers, against 134 for GLM-4.6V.
Run Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 and GLM-4.6V on your own prompt
Benchmarks aren't your data. Try both side by side in the playground, with the cost of every answer.