Compare / Qwen3.6-Max-Preview vs GLM-4.7
Qwen3.6-Max-Preview vs GLM-4.7
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.
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 13 October 2026 (catalogue release 2026-10-13-2e2420e3c5cc). See also Alibaba vs Z.ai, every model from both labs.
Qwen3.6-Max-Preview or GLM-4.7? The short answer
Pick Qwen3.6-Max-Preview if quality matters most: it scores higher (Intelligence Index 28.4 against 22.2). Pick GLM-4.7 if cost matters more: it costs 2.6 times less per token.
- GLM-4.7 is cheaper: $0.90 against $2.31 per million tokens, 2.6 times less.
- Qwen3.6-Max-Preview scores higher on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index: 28.4 against 22.2.
- Qwen3.6-Max-Preview is newer: released 20 Apr 2026, against 22 Dec 2025 for GLM-4.7.
- On third-party benchmarks, on the results both models have: Qwen3.6-Max-Preview does better for agents and tool use, reasoning and knowledge, writing and sticking to the facts.
Head to head
Every fact side by side
| Qwen3.6-Max-Preview | GLM-4.7 | |
|---|---|---|
| Price per million tokens | $1.03 in · $6.16 out | $0.54 in · $1.98 out |
| Blended (3 in : 1 out) | $2.31 | $0.90 |
| Cheapest host, blended | – | $0.74 (DeepInfra, FP4) |
| Intelligence Index | 28.4 | 22.2 |
| Spring Prompt overall | – | – |
| Output speed, tokens a second | – | – |
| Context window | 262,144 tokens | 204,800 tokens |
| Released | 20 Apr 2026 (newer) | 22 Dec 2025 |
| Weights | Closed | 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 | Qwen3.6-Max-Preview | GLM-4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| Arena (formerly LMArena) reported by Arena (formerly LMArena) · 3 results | ||
| Overall · TextArena rating, higher is better 51 · 81 of 387 measured | 1,460 | 1,441 |
| Overall · Text factualityArena rating, higher is better 51 · 72 of 163 measured | 1,453 | 1,444 |
| Business, management and finance · TextArena rating, higher is better 64 · 81 of 380 measured | 1,451 | 1,442 |
| Artificial Analysis reported by Artificial Analysis · 3 results | ||
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence Indexindex score, higher is better 57 · 92 of 243 measured | 28.4 | 22.2 |
| GPQA Diamond% of questions, higher is better 55 · 73 of 231 measured | 88.8% | 85.9% |
| Humanity's Last Exam% of questions, higher is better 70 · 88 of 242 measured | 30.8% | 27.4% |
| SimpleQA Verified (Epoch AI) reported by SimpleQA Verified (Epoch AI) · 1 result | ||
| Correct answers% of questions, higher is better 21 · 56 of 76 measured | 52.0% | 32.2% |
| Vending-Bench 2 reported by Vending-Bench 2 · 1 result | ||
| Money after a yearUS dollars, higher is better 31 · 39 of 58 measured | $4,254 | $2,377 |
Show all 16 results (8 more)
| Measure | Qwen3.6-Max-Preview | GLM-4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| Arena (formerly LMArena) reported by Arena (formerly LMArena) · 4 results | ||
| Creative writing · TextArena rating, higher is better 50 · 88 of 385 measured | 1,437 | 1,405 |
| Expert prompts · TextArena rating, higher is better 36 · 100 of 338 measured | 1,500 | 1,449 |
| Instruction following · TextArena rating, higher is better 56 · 88 of 387 measured | 1,450 | 1,425 |
| Writing, literature and language · TextArena rating, higher is better 50 · 84 of 386 measured | 1,446 | 1,416 |
| Artificial Analysis reported by Artificial Analysis · 4 results | ||
| IFBench% of instructions, higher is better 14 · 62 of 195 measured | 76.6% | 67.9% |
| Long-context reasoning (AA-LCR)% of questions, higher is better 33 · 105 of 233 measured | 80.7% | 71.0% |
| Terminal-Bench Hard% of tasks, higher is better 23 · 63 of 190 measured | 43.9% | 31.8% |
| τ²-bench telecom% of tasks, higher is better 12 · 12 of 193 measured | 95.9% | 95.9% |
Compare them with other models
Quick answers
Is Qwen3.6-Max-Preview better than GLM-4.7?
Pick Qwen3.6-Max-Preview if quality matters most: it scores higher (Intelligence Index 28.4 against 22.2). Pick GLM-4.7 if cost matters more: it costs 2.6 times less per token.
Which is cheaper, Qwen3.6-Max-Preview or GLM-4.7?
GLM-4.7 is cheaper: $0.90 against $2.31 per million tokens, 2.6 times less.
Which is better for agents and tool use, Qwen3.6-Max-Preview or GLM-4.7?
Qwen3.6-Max-Preview ranks 81 of 164 models on sale for multi-step tasks with tools: support desks, coding agents, function calls, against 102 for GLM-4.7.
Which is better for reasoning and knowledge, Qwen3.6-Max-Preview or GLM-4.7?
Qwen3.6-Max-Preview ranks 59 of 198 models on sale for hard questions across science, maths and general knowledge, against 80 for GLM-4.7.
Which is better for writing, Qwen3.6-Max-Preview or GLM-4.7?
Qwen3.6-Max-Preview ranks 41 of 188 models on sale for what people prefer in blind comparisons, and judged writing quality, against 72 for GLM-4.7.
Which is better for sticking to the facts, Qwen3.6-Max-Preview or GLM-4.7?
Qwen3.6-Max-Preview ranks 45 of 152 models on sale for summarising without inventing things, and factual answers, against 103 for GLM-4.7.
Which has the bigger context window, Qwen3.6-Max-Preview or GLM-4.7?
Qwen3.6-Max-Preview: 262,144 tokens, against 204,800 for GLM-4.7.
Run Qwen3.6-Max-Preview and GLM-4.7 on your own prompt
Benchmarks aren't your data. Try both side by side in the playground, with the cost of every answer.