Compare / Qwen3-Max vs GLM-4.7-Flash
Qwen3-Max vs GLM-4.7-Flash
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-Max or GLM-4.7-Flash? The short answer
They score about the same, so pick GLM-4.7-Flash: it costs 11 times less per token.
- GLM-4.7-Flash is cheaper: $0.15 against $1.56 per million tokens, 11 times less.
- They score about the same on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index (15.6 and 14.9).
- GLM-4.7-Flash is newer: released 19 Jan 2026, against 24 Sep 2025 for Qwen3-Max.
- On third-party benchmarks, on the results both models have: Qwen3-Max does better for reasoning and knowledge and writing.
Head to head
Every fact side by side
| Qwen3-Max | GLM-4.7-Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| Price per million tokens | $0.78 in · $3.90 out | $0.060 in · $0.40 out |
| Blended (3 in : 1 out) | $1.56 | $0.15 |
| Cheapest host, blended | – | $0.15 (Venice, FP8) |
| Intelligence Index | 15.6 | 14.9 |
| Spring Prompt overall | – | – |
| Output speed, tokens a second | – | – |
| Context window | 262,144 tokens | 200,000 tokens |
| Released | 24 Sep 2025 | 19 Jan 2026 (newer) |
| 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-Max | GLM-4.7-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Arena (formerly LMArena) reported by Arena (formerly LMArena) · 3 results | ||
| Overall · TextArena rating, higher is better 108 · 173 of 387 measured | 1,423 | 1,365 |
| Business, management and finance · TextArena rating, higher is better 110 · 170 of 380 measured | 1,419 | 1,368 |
| Creative writing · TextArena rating, higher is better 105 · 200 of 385 measured | 1,393 | 1,307 |
| Artificial Analysis reported by Artificial Analysis · 3 results | ||
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence Indexindex score, higher is better 123 · 128 of 243 measured | 15.6 | 14.9 |
| GPQA Diamond% of questions, higher is better 132 · 186 of 231 measured | 76.4% | 58.1% |
| Humanity's Last Exam% of questions, higher is better 140 · 164 of 242 measured | 11.9% | 7.6% |
| UGI Leaderboard reported by UGI Leaderboard · 3 results | ||
| Writing score · UGIscore out of 100, higher is better 115 · 179 of 230 measured | 38.6 | 25.0no reasoning |
| Requested-length error · UGI% off the requested word count, lower is better 134 · 188 of 230 measured | 23.0% | 39.0%no reasoning |
| Style adherence · UGIscore from 0 to 1, higher is better 155 · 45 of 230 measured | 0.33 | 0.37think-prefill reasoning |
Show all 16 results (7 more)
| Measure | Qwen3-Max | GLM-4.7-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Arena (formerly LMArena) reported by Arena (formerly LMArena) · 3 results | ||
| Expert prompts · TextArena rating, higher is better 137 · 169 of 338 measured | 1,417 | 1,386 |
| Instruction following · TextArena rating, higher is better 106 · 178 of 387 measured | 1,413 | 1,348 |
| Writing, literature and language · TextArena rating, higher is better 101 · 189 of 386 measured | 1,405 | 1,331 |
| Artificial Analysis reported by Artificial Analysis · 4 results | ||
| IFBench% of instructions, higher is better 118 · 78 of 195 measured | 44.2% | 60.8% |
| Long-context reasoning (AA-LCR)% of questions, higher is better 154 · 169 of 233 measured | 50.0% | 41.7% |
| Terminal-Bench Hard% of tasks, higher is better 91 · 87 of 190 measured | 20.5% | 22.0% |
| τ²-bench telecom% of tasks, higher is better 79 · 2 of 193 measured | 74.3% | 98.8% |
Compare them with other models
Quick answers
Is Qwen3-Max better than GLM-4.7-Flash?
They score about the same, so pick GLM-4.7-Flash: it costs 11 times less per token.
Which is cheaper, Qwen3-Max or GLM-4.7-Flash?
GLM-4.7-Flash is cheaper: $0.15 against $1.56 per million tokens, 11 times less.
Which is better for reasoning and knowledge, Qwen3-Max or GLM-4.7-Flash?
Qwen3-Max ranks 121 of 198 models on sale for hard questions across science, maths and general knowledge, against 142 for GLM-4.7-Flash.
Which is better for writing, Qwen3-Max or GLM-4.7-Flash?
Qwen3-Max ranks 99 of 188 models on sale for what people prefer in blind comparisons, and judged writing quality, against 150 for GLM-4.7-Flash.
Which is better for sticking to the facts, Qwen3-Max or GLM-4.7-Flash?
Qwen3-Max ranks 50 of 152 models on sale for summarising without inventing things, and factual answers, against 109 for GLM-4.7-Flash.
Which has the bigger context window, Qwen3-Max or GLM-4.7-Flash?
Qwen3-Max: 262,144 tokens, against 200,000 for GLM-4.7-Flash.
Run Qwen3-Max and GLM-4.7-Flash on your own prompt
Benchmarks aren't your data. Try both side by side in the playground, with the cost of every answer.