Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GLM 4.5 Air vs Qwen3.7 Plus

Qwen3.7 Plus leads GLM 4.5 Air on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 25.2 to 11.1, at about the same output price ($1.28 vs $1.10 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 42 benchmarks have a result for both.

Replace GLM 4.5 Air Replace Qwen3.7 Plus
GLM 4.5 AirZ.ai
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$1.10
0
Qwen3.7 PlusQwen
Coding
33.2
Overall
54.0
Output $/M
$1.28
42
vs boards won of 42 shared

GLM 4.5 Air or Qwen3.7 Plus: which to pick

Only Qwen3.7 Plus has a coding score, 33.2 on the Vibe Coding Index; GLM 4.5 Air has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick GLM 4.5 Air for output tokens 1.2x cheaper ($1.10 vs $1.28 per million).

Model AGLM 4.5 AirZ.aiNot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved taskModel BQwen3.7 PlusQwen33.2/1002 independent benchmarksNo cost per solved task
Shared results
42
GLM 4.5 Air only
6
Qwen3.7 Plus only
33
Like-for-like categories
8 of 9

Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.

Which one for your work

Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.

At a glance

Coding index
GLM 4.5 Air not benchmarked, Qwen3.7 Plus 33.2 from 2 benchmarks.
Widest category
Agentic work, 46.5 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
τ²-Bench Telecom: GLM 4.5 Air 46.5% against Qwen3.7 Plus 93.0%, 46.5 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GLM 4.5 Air $1.10 against Qwen3.7 Plus $1.28 per million output tokens, 1.2x apart.
Context window
GLM 4.5 Air takes 131K tokens, Qwen3.7 Plus 1M.

Benchmark by benchmark

First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryGLM 4.5 AirBarsQwen3.7 PlusTies
Coding03
Intelligence01
Agentic work01
Reasoning05
Math02
Knowledge04
Web design07
General019
All shared boards042
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index03
Coding benchmarks for GLM 4.5 Air and Qwen3.7 Plus
BenchmarkGLM 4.5 AirQwen3.7 PlusLeader
AA Coding IndexNot measured55.9Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)Not measured46.4%Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
Code migration (Vals AI)Not measured12.9%Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)Not measured52.8%Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
SkillsBench (Vals AI)Not measured54.3%Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)68.4%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
SciCodeNot measured46.1%Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)20.5%47.0%Qwen3.7 Plus
FrontierCodeNot measured10.2%Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
GSO-Bench2.9%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
LMArena Text: coding13971473Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: software and IT14011473Qwen3.7 Plus
Neither model has a result on the other 27 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for GLM 4.5 Air and Qwen3.7 Plus
BenchmarkGLM 4.5 AirQwen3.7 PlusLeader
AA Intelligence Index11.125.2Qwen3.7 Plus
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured147.0Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Agentic work benchmarks for GLM 4.5 Air and Qwen3.7 Plus
BenchmarkGLM 4.5 AirQwen3.7 PlusLeader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured17.5Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)Not measured38.2%Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)Not measured10.5%Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)Not measured16.4%Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)Not measured49.3%Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
τ²-Bench Telecom46.5%93.0%Qwen3.7 Plus
OSWorld 2.0Not measured2.8%Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
Neither model has a result on the other 34 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index05
Reasoning benchmarks for GLM 4.5 Air and Qwen3.7 Plus
BenchmarkGLM 4.5 AirQwen3.7 PlusLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)73.3%90.0%Qwen3.7 Plus
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)7.0%35.6%Qwen3.7 Plus
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)Not measured87.9%Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
Mystery game puzzlesNot measured17.0%Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts13791460Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: expert13701466Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English13881460Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Vision: diagramsNot measured1292Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
LMArena Vision: homeworkNot measured1295Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
Kagi LLM Benchmark43.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Math benchmarks for GLM 4.5 Air and Qwen3.7 Plus
BenchmarkGLM 4.5 AirQwen3.7 PlusLeader
AA Math Index80.7Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)80.7%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
OTIS Mock AIMENot measured93.3%Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3Not measured34.4%Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
LMArena Text: math13961467Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: mathematical work13961470Qwen3.7 Plus
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
Knowledge benchmarks for GLM 4.5 Air and Qwen3.7 Plus
BenchmarkGLM 4.5 AirQwen3.7 PlusLeader
MortgageTax (Vals AI)Not measured66.2%Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)81.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 Air measured
LMArena Text: science14071464Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14021464Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: legal and government13821451Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: business and finance13711435Qwen3.7 Plus
Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index07
Web design benchmarks for GLM 4.5 Air and Qwen3.7 Plus
BenchmarkGLM 4.5 AirQwen3.7 PlusLeader
Design Arena: websites11461269Qwen3.7 Plus
Design Arena: UI components11201258Qwen3.7 Plus
Design Arena: game dev10941261Qwen3.7 Plus
Design Arena: data viz11861276Qwen3.7 Plus
Design Arena: 3D11221238Qwen3.7 Plus
Design Arena: all code categories11371269Qwen3.7 Plus
Design Arena: SVG10711208Qwen3.7 Plus
Design Arena: ASCII artNot measured1143Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index019
General benchmarks for GLM 4.5 Air and Qwen3.7 Plus
BenchmarkGLM 4.5 AirQwen3.7 PlusLeader
SAGE (Vals AI)Not measured39.3%Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
Vals Multimodal IndexNot measured53.9%Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
IFBench37.6%78.0%Qwen3.7 Plus
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)46.7%73.0%Qwen3.7 Plus
DTBenchNot measured84.0%Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
LMCANot measured37.6%Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
LMArena Text13841454Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: instruction following13541439Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: creative writing13431438Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena VisionNot measured1278Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
LMArena Text: English13971458Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: non-English13661445Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: Chinese14261509Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: German13771471Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: Japanese13481412Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: Korean13081413Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: French14001472Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: Spanish13851457Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: Russian13731457Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: Polish13681449Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: multi-turn13711459Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: longer queries13661454Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: writing and language13541437Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text: entertainment and media13391422Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Vision: EnglishNot measured1280Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
LMArena Vision: ChineseNot measured1332Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
LMArena Vision: reading textNot measured1288Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
LMArena Vision: humorNot measured1261Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
LMArena Vision: creative writingNot measured1258Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
LMArena DocumentNot measured1444Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured
Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GLM 4.5 Air and Qwen3.7 Plus
BenchmarkGLM 4.5 AirQwen3.7 PlusLeader
Neither model has a result on 5 boards here

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.

Chat turn

1K input + 500 output tokens

GLM 4.5 Air$0.0008Fits in one request
Qwen3.7 Plus$0.0010Fits in one request

GLM 4.5 Air costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GLM 4.5 Air$0.013Fits in one request
Qwen3.7 Plus$0.020Fits in one request

GLM 4.5 Air costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GLM 4.5 Air$0.051Exceeds the context window
Qwen3.7 Plus$0.077Fits in one request

GLM 4.5 Air costs less

Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.

Specification differences

The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.

Specifications of GLM 4.5 Air and Qwen3.7 Plus
SpecificationZ.ai GLM 4.5 AirQwen3.7 Plus
MakerZ.aiQwen
WeightsOpen weightsNo public weights listed
ReleasedJuly 25, 2025June 3, 2026
Context window131K1M
Input $/Mtok$0.20$0.32
Output $/Mtok$1.10$1.28
Coding indexNot benchmarked33.2
Independent measurements behind it02
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GLM 4.5 Air better than Qwen3.7 Plus for coding?

Only Qwen3.7 Plus has a coding score, 33.2 on the Vibe Coding Index; GLM 4.5 Air has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick GLM 4.5 Air for output tokens 1.2x cheaper ($1.10 vs $1.28 per million).

Which is cheaper, GLM 4.5 Air or Qwen3.7 Plus?

GLM 4.5 Air costs $0.20 per million input tokens and $1.10 per million output tokens; Qwen3.7 Plus costs $0.32 and $1.28. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, GLM 4.5 Air or Qwen3.7 Plus?

Qwen3.7 Plus, with 1M tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks is the GLM 4.5 Air vs Qwen3.7 Plus comparison based on?

42 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. GLM 4.5 Air's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Qwen3.7 Plus's on 2. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next