Compare / Qwen3.5-Flash vs GLM-5

Qwen3.5-Flash vs GLM-5

Which is cheaper, which is more capable, and which does better at each kind of work, from 16 results on 4 sources that measured both models.

AlibabaQwen3.5-Flash $0.065 in · $0.26 out
Z.aiGLM-5 Released 12 Feb 2026 · $0.95 in · $2.55 out
Qwen3.5-Flash wins 1GLM-5 wins 15

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.

Qwen3.5-Flash or GLM-5? The short answer

They score about the same, so pick Qwen3.5-Flash: it costs 12 times less per token.

  • Qwen3.5-Flash is cheaper: $0.11 against $1.35 per million tokens, 12 times less.
  • On third-party benchmarks, on the results both models have: GLM-5 does better for agents and tool use, writing and sticking to the facts.

Head to head

$0.11
Price per million tokens, blendedlower is better
$1.35
1,000,000
Context window, tokens
204,800

Every fact side by side

Qwen3.5-FlashGLM-5
Price per million tokens$0.065 in · $0.26 out$0.95 in · $2.55 out
Blended (3 in : 1 out)$0.11$1.35
Cheapest host, blended–$0.93 (GMICloud, FP8)
Intelligence Index–27.9
Spring Prompt overall––
Output speed, tokens a second––
Context window1,000,000 tokens204,800 tokens
Released–12 Feb 2026
WeightsClosedOpen
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 143 of 164 100 of 164
Reasoning and knowledgeHard questions across science, maths and general knowledge not measured 75 of 198
WritingWhat people prefer in blind comparisons, and judged writing quality 115 of 188 52 of 188
Sticking to the factsSummarising without inventing things, and factual answers 119 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.

MeasureQwen3.5-FlashGLM-5
Arena (formerly LMArena) reported by Arena (formerly LMArena) · 3 results
Overall · TextArena rating, higher is better 142 · 54 of 387 measured 1,396 1,458
Overall · Text factualityArena rating, higher is better 123 · 56 of 163 measured 1,414 1,452
Business, management and finance · TextArena rating, higher is better 137 · 65 of 380 measured 1,403 1,451
OpenHands Index reported by OpenHands Index · 3 results
Average% resolved, higher is better 30 · 17 of 34 measured 38.1%openhands 49.4%openhands
Front end (SWE-Bench Multimodal)% resolved, higher is better 24 · 17 of 34 measured 27.9%openhands 35.3%openhands
Greenfield (Commit0)% resolved, higher is better 25 · 13 of 34 measured 12.5%openhands 31.2%openhands
Vectara Hallucination Leaderboard reported by Vectara Hallucination Leaderboard · 2 results
Hallucination rate · Vectara% of summaries, lower is better 62 · 59 of 104 measured 10.5% 10.1%
Answer rate · Vectara% of documents, higher is better 31 · 41 of 104 measured 99.8% 99.7%
Vending-Bench 2 reported by Vending-Bench 2 · 1 result
Money after a yearUS dollars, higher is better 48 · 30 of 58 measured $462.69 $4,432
Show all 16 results (7 more)
MeasureQwen3.5-FlashGLM-5
Arena (formerly LMArena) reported by Arena (formerly LMArena) · 4 results
Creative writing · TextArena rating, higher is better 167 · 33 of 385 measured 1,337 1,449
Expert prompts · TextArena rating, higher is better 135 · 61 of 338 measured 1,419 1,482
Instruction following · TextArena rating, higher is better 148 · 60 of 387 measured 1,381 1,446
Writing, literature and language · TextArena rating, higher is better 149 · 46 of 386 measured 1,367 1,449
OpenHands Index reported by OpenHands Index · 3 results
Information gathering (GAIA)% resolved, higher is better 23 · 18 of 34 measured 49.7%openhands 60.0%openhands
Issue resolution (SWE-Bench)% resolved, higher is better 31 · 20 of 34 measured 62.0%openhands 73.4%openhands
Testing (SWT-Bench)% resolved, higher is better 31 · 27 of 34 measured 38.3%openhands 47.3%openhands

Quick answers

Is Qwen3.5-Flash better than GLM-5?

They score about the same, so pick Qwen3.5-Flash: it costs 12 times less per token.

Which is cheaper, Qwen3.5-Flash or GLM-5?

Qwen3.5-Flash is cheaper: $0.11 against $1.35 per million tokens, 12 times less.

Which is better for agents and tool use, Qwen3.5-Flash 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 143 for Qwen3.5-Flash.

Which is better for writing, Qwen3.5-Flash or GLM-5?

GLM-5 ranks 52 of 188 models on sale for what people prefer in blind comparisons, and judged writing quality, against 115 for Qwen3.5-Flash.

Which is better for sticking to the facts, Qwen3.5-Flash or GLM-5?

GLM-5 ranks 69 of 152 models on sale for summarising without inventing things, and factual answers, against 119 for Qwen3.5-Flash.

Which has the bigger context window, Qwen3.5-Flash or GLM-5?

Qwen3.5-Flash: 1,000,000 tokens, against 204,800 for GLM-5.

Run Qwen3.5-Flash 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