Compare / Qwen3-32B vs GLM-5

Qwen3-32B vs GLM-5

Which is cheaper, which is more capable, and which does better at each kind of work, from 18 results on 4 sources that measured both models.

AlibabaQwen3-32B Released 28 Apr 2025 · $0.14 in · $0.40 out
Z.aiGLM-5 Released 12 Feb 2026 · $0.95 in · $2.55 out
Qwen3-32B wins 3GLM-5 wins 15

Of the 18 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.

Qwen3-32B or GLM-5? The short answer

Pick GLM-5 if quality matters most: it scores higher (Intelligence Index 27.9 against 8.6). Pick Qwen3-32B if cost matters more: it costs 6.6 times less per token.

  • Qwen3-32B is cheaper: $0.21 against $1.35 per million tokens, 6.6 times less.
  • GLM-5 scores higher on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index: 27.9 against 8.6.
  • GLM-5 is newer: released 12 Feb 2026, against 28 Apr 2025 for Qwen3-32B.
  • On third-party benchmarks, on the results both models have: Qwen3-32B does better for sticking to the facts; GLM-5 for reasoning and knowledge and writing.

Head to head

8.6
Intelligence Index
27.9
$0.21
Price per million tokens, blendedlower is better
$1.35
131,072
Context window, tokens
204,800

Every fact side by side

Qwen3-32BGLM-5
Price per million tokens$0.14 in · $0.40 out$0.95 in · $2.55 out
Blended (3 in : 1 out)$0.21$1.35
Cheapest host, blended$0.13 (DeepInfra, FP8)$0.93 (GMICloud, FP8)
Intelligence Index8.627.9
Spring Prompt overall––
Output speed, tokens a second––
Context window131,072 tokens204,800 tokens
Released28 Apr 202512 Feb 2026 (newer)
WeightsOpenOpen
Developer based inChinaChina

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.

Agents and tool useMulti-step tasks with tools: support desks, coding agents, function calls 113 of 164 100 of 164
Reasoning and knowledgeHard questions across science, maths and general knowledge 148 of 198 75 of 198
WritingWhat people prefer in blind comparisons, and judged writing quality 139 of 188 52 of 188
Sticking to the factsSummarising without inventing things, and factual answers 22 of 152 69 of 152

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.

MeasureQwen3-32BGLM-5
Arena (formerly LMArena) reported by Arena (formerly LMArena) · 3 results
Overall · TextArena rating, higher is better 195 · 54 of 387 measured 1,347 1,458
Business, management and finance · TextArena rating, higher is better 203 · 65 of 380 measured 1,340 1,451
Creative writing · TextArena rating, higher is better 205 · 33 of 385 measured 1,304 1,449
Artificial Analysis reported by Artificial Analysis · 3 results
Artificial Analysis Intelligence Indexindex score, higher is better 188 · 60 of 243 measured 8.6thinking reasoning 27.9
GPQA Diamond% of questions, higher is better 167 · 101 of 231 measured 66.8%thinking reasoning 82.0%
Humanity's Last Exam% of questions, higher is better 168 · 75 of 242 measured 7.4%thinking reasoning 29.3%
UGI Leaderboard reported by UGI Leaderboard · 3 results
Writing score · UGIscore out of 100, higher is better 134 · 59 of 230 measured 33.0no reasoning 55.0thinking reasoning
Requested-length error · UGI% off the requested word count, lower is better 99 · 177 of 230 measured 19.0%no reasoning 34.0%thinking reasoning
Style adherence · UGIscore from 0 to 1, higher is better 175 · 11 of 230 measured 0.32no reasoning 0.40no reasoning
Vectara Hallucination Leaderboard reported by Vectara Hallucination Leaderboard · 2 results
Hallucination rate · Vectara% of summaries, lower is better 24 · 59 of 104 measured 5.9% 10.1%
Answer rate · Vectara% of documents, higher is better 17 · 41 of 104 measured 99.9% 99.7%
Show all 18 results (7 more)
MeasureQwen3-32BGLM-5
Arena (formerly LMArena) reported by Arena (formerly LMArena) · 3 results
Expert prompts · TextArena rating, higher is better 159 · 61 of 338 measured 1,398 1,482
Instruction following · TextArena rating, higher is better 198 · 60 of 387 measured 1,331 1,446
Writing, literature and language · TextArena rating, higher is better 217 · 46 of 386 measured 1,308 1,449
Artificial Analysis reported by Artificial Analysis · 4 results
IFBench% of instructions, higher is better 155 · 41 of 195 measured 36.3%thinking reasoning 72.3%
Long-context reasoning (AA-LCR)% of questions, higher is better 222 · 76 of 233 measured 0.0%no reasoning 75.7%
Terminal-Bench Hard% of tasks, higher is better 169 · 26 of 190 measured 3.0%thinking reasoning 43.2%
τ²-bench telecom% of tasks, higher is better 135 · 6 of 193 measured 29.8%thinking reasoning 98.2%

Quick answers

Is Qwen3-32B better than GLM-5?

Pick GLM-5 if quality matters most: it scores higher (Intelligence Index 27.9 against 8.6). Pick Qwen3-32B if cost matters more: it costs 6.6 times less per token.

Which is cheaper, Qwen3-32B or GLM-5?

Qwen3-32B is cheaper: $0.21 against $1.35 per million tokens, 6.6 times less.

Which is better for agents and tool use, Qwen3-32B or GLM-5?

GLM-5 ranks 100 of 164 models on sale for multi-step tasks with tools: support desks, coding agents, function calls, against 113 for Qwen3-32B.

Which is better for reasoning and knowledge, Qwen3-32B or GLM-5?

GLM-5 ranks 75 of 198 models on sale for hard questions across science, maths and general knowledge, against 148 for Qwen3-32B.

Which is better for writing, Qwen3-32B or GLM-5?

GLM-5 ranks 52 of 188 models on sale for what people prefer in blind comparisons, and judged writing quality, against 139 for Qwen3-32B.

Which is better for sticking to the facts, Qwen3-32B or GLM-5?

Qwen3-32B ranks 22 of 152 models on sale for summarising without inventing things, and factual answers, against 69 for GLM-5.

Which has the bigger context window, Qwen3-32B or GLM-5?

GLM-5: 204,800 tokens, against 131,072 for Qwen3-32B.

Run Qwen3-32B and GLM-5 on your own prompt

Benchmarks aren't your data. Try both side by side in the playground, with the cost of every answer.

Try the playgroundTalk to us