GLM 4.5 vs Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
GLM 4.5 leads Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 12.8 to 12.7, and GLM 4.5 costs 1.6x less per output token ($2.20 vs $3.50 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 36 benchmarks have a result for both.
GLM 4.5 or Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507: which to pick
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Pick GLM 4.5 for output tokens 1.6x cheaper ($2.20 vs $3.50 per million) and a larger context window (131K against 128K tokens).
- Shared results
- 36
- GLM 4.5 only
- 26
- Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 only
- 10
- Like-for-like categories
- 7 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.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Neither has a coding score yet.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
GLM 4.5
GLM 4.5 leads, 12.8 against 12.7.
Same board, both measured
Agentic work
AA Agentic Index
No call
Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 has a AA Agentic Index result, 1.3.
Directional only
Reasoning
GPQA Diamond
No call
Only GLM 4.5 has a GPQA Diamond result, 72.2%.
Directional only
Math
AIME
No call
Only GLM 4.5 has a AIME result, 86.7%.
Directional only
Knowledge
MMLU Pro
No call
Only GLM 4.5 has a MMLU Pro result, 81.2%.
Directional only
Web design
Design Arena: websites
GLM 4.5
GLM 4.5 leads, 1169 against 1052.
Same board, both measured
Long documents
Listed context window
GLM 4.5
GLM 4.5 takes 131K tokens against 128K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
GLM 4.5
GLM 4.5 $0.0017, Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 $0.0022 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- GLM 4.5 not benchmarked, Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 not benchmarked.
- Widest category
- Web design, 21.2 points apart on average over 6 shared benchmarks.
- Widest single gap
- Design Arena: data viz: GLM 4.5 1159 against Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 950, 26.1 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- GLM 4.5 $2.20 against Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 $3.50 per million output tokens, 1.6x apart.
- Context window
- GLM 4.5 takes 131K tokens, Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 128K.
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.
| Category | GLM 4.5 | Bars | Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 2 | 1 | ||
| Intelligence | 1 | 0 | ||
| Reasoning | 1 | 2 | ||
| Math | 1 | 1 | ||
| Knowledge | 3 | 1 | ||
| Web design | 6 | 0 | ||
| General | 14 | 3 | ||
| All shared boards | 28 | 8 |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index21
| Benchmark | GLM 4.5 | Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified | 64.2% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| AA Coding Index | Not measured | 22.1 | Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) | 67.5% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) | 73.8% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | 22.0% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| WeirdML | 40.6% | 41.0% | Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 |
| ALE-Bench | 344.8 | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: coding | 1434 | 1424 | GLM 4.5 |
| LMArena Text: software and IT | 1440 | 1431 | GLM 4.5 |
| Neither model has a result on the other 34 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
| Benchmark | GLM 4.5 | Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 12.8 | 12.7 | GLM 4.5 |
| Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here | |||
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index3 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GLM 4.5 | Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Agentic Index | Not measured | 1.3 | Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured |
| τ²-Bench Telecom | 43.0% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| Vending-Bench 2 | Not measured | -$11 | Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 39 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index12
| Benchmark | GLM 4.5 | Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 72.2% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 78.2% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 13.0% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | Not measured | 80.1% | Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured |
| Mystery game puzzles | Not measured | 9.0% | Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts | 1429 | 1416 | GLM 4.5 |
| LMArena Text: expert | 1433 | 1463 | Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts in English | 1429 | 1432 | Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 57.9% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 14 boards here | |||
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index11
| Benchmark | GLM 4.5 | Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AIME | 86.7% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| MATH 500 (Vals AI) | 94.0% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| MGSM (Vals AI) | 90.8% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| AA Math Index | 73.7 | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run) | 73.7% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| OTIS Mock AIME | Not measured | 86.7% | Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured |
| LMArena Text: math | 1427 | 1412 | GLM 4.5 |
| LMArena Text: mathematical work | 1430 | 1435 | Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 |
| MathArena | 13.2% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here | |||
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index31
| Benchmark | GLM 4.5 | Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro | 81.2% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| LegalBench (Vals AI) | 75.6% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| CorpFin (Vals AI) | 61.0% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| TaxEval (Vals AI) | 72.4% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| MedQA (Vals AI) | 90.0% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run) | 83.5% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| SimpleQA Verified | Not measured | 40.4% | Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured |
| LMArena Text: science | 1444 | 1433 | GLM 4.5 |
| LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare | 1455 | 1456 | Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 |
| LMArena Text: legal and government | 1438 | 1415 | GLM 4.5 |
| LMArena Text: business and finance | 1420 | 1413 | GLM 4.5 |
| Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here | |||
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index60
| Benchmark | GLM 4.5 | Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: websites | 1169 | 1052 | GLM 4.5 |
| Design Arena: UI components | 1141 | 942 | GLM 4.5 |
| Design Arena: game dev | 1144 | 956 | GLM 4.5 |
| Design Arena: data viz | 1159 | 950 | GLM 4.5 |
| Design Arena: 3D | 1170 | 997 | GLM 4.5 |
| Design Arena: all code categories | 1164 | 1032 | GLM 4.5 |
| Design Arena: SVG | 1095 | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 2 boards here | |||
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index143
| Benchmark | GLM 4.5 | Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| IFBench | 44.1% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 52.7% | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| DTBench | Not measured | 80.3% | Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured |
| LMCA | Not measured | 29.3% | Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured |
| Fiction.LiveBench | Not measured | 75.0% | Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured |
| Creative writing (Lech Mazur) | 73.4% | 82.4% | Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 |
| LMArena Text | 1430 | 1415 | GLM 4.5 |
| LMArena Text: instruction following | 1404 | 1386 | GLM 4.5 |
| LMArena Text: creative writing | 1395 | 1384 | GLM 4.5 |
| LMArena Text: English | 1437 | 1429 | GLM 4.5 |
| LMArena Text: non-English | 1417 | 1397 | GLM 4.5 |
| LMArena Text: Chinese | 1465 | 1481 | Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 |
| LMArena Text: German | 1407 | 1408 | Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 |
| LMArena Text: Japanese | 1415 | 1386 | GLM 4.5 |
| LMArena Text: Korean | 1380 | 1375 | GLM 4.5 |
| LMArena Text: French | 1418 | Not measured | Only GLM 4.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: Spanish | 1454 | 1389 | GLM 4.5 |
| LMArena Text: Russian | 1413 | 1401 | GLM 4.5 |
| LMArena Text: Polish | 1422 | 1390 | GLM 4.5 |
| LMArena Text: multi-turn | 1415 | 1406 | GLM 4.5 |
| LMArena Text: longer queries | 1412 | 1400 | GLM 4.5 |
| LMArena Text: writing and language | 1403 | 1388 | GLM 4.5 |
| LMArena Text: entertainment and media | 1404 | 1370 | GLM 4.5 |
| Neither model has a result on the other 25 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GLM 4.5 | Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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 costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 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.
| Specification | Z.ai GLM 4.5 | Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Z.ai | Qwen |
| Weights | Open weights | Open weights |
| Released | July 25, 2025 | July 25, 2025 |
| Context window | 131K | 128K |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.60 | $0.45 |
| Output $/Mtok | $2.20 | $3.50 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | Not benchmarked |
| Independent measurements behind it | 0 | 0 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is GLM 4.5 better than Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 for coding?
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick GLM 4.5 for output tokens 1.6x cheaper ($2.20 vs $3.50 per million) and a larger context window (131K against 128K tokens).
Which is cheaper, GLM 4.5 or Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507?
GLM 4.5 costs $0.60 per million input tokens and $2.20 per million output tokens; Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 costs $0.45 and $3.50. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, GLM 4.5 or Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507?
GLM 4.5, with 131K tokens against 128K.
How many benchmarks is the GLM 4.5 vs Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 comparison based on?
36 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. GLM 4.5's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.