Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GLM 4.5 vs Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking

GLM 4.5 leads Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 12.8 to 11.2, and Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking costs 1.8x less per output token ($1.20 vs $2.20 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 29 benchmarks have a result for both.

Replace GLM 4.5 Replace Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking
GLM 4.5Z.ai
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$2.20
29
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B ThinkingQwen
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$1.20
0
vs boards won of 29 shared

GLM 4.5 or Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking: which to pick

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Compare them on price, context and the boards below.

Model AGLM 4.5Z.aiNot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved taskModel BQwen3 Next 80B A3B ThinkingQwenNot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved task
Shared results
29
GLM 4.5 only
32
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking only
1
Like-for-like categories
6 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 not benchmarked, Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking not benchmarked.
Widest category
General, 12.2 points apart on average over 17 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
LMArena Text: Japanese: GLM 4.5 1415 against Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking 1280, 22.5 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GLM 4.5 $2.20 against Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking $1.20 per million output tokens, 1.8x apart.
Context window
GLM 4.5 takes 131K tokens, Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking 262K.

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 4.5BarsQwen3 Next 80B A3B ThinkingTies
Coding20
Intelligence10
Reasoning30
Math20
Knowledge40
General170
All shared boards290
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index20
Coding benchmarks for GLM 4.5 and Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking
BenchmarkGLM 4.5Qwen3 Next 80B A3B ThinkingLeader
SWE-bench Verified64.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
AA Coding IndexNot measured17.4Only Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)67.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)73.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)22.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
WeirdML40.6%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
ALE-Bench344.8Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: coding14341392GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: software and IT14401393GLM 4.5
Neither model has a result on the other 30 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for GLM 4.5 and Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking
BenchmarkGLM 4.5Qwen3 Next 80B A3B ThinkingLeader
AA Intelligence Index12.811.2GLM 4.5
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for GLM 4.5 and Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking
BenchmarkGLM 4.5Qwen3 Next 80B A3B ThinkingLeader
τ²-Bench Telecom43.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 40 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index30
Reasoning benchmarks for GLM 4.5 and Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking
BenchmarkGLM 4.5Qwen3 Next 80B A3B ThinkingLeader
GPQA Diamond72.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)78.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)13.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts14291371GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: expert14331376GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English14291384GLM 4.5
Kagi LLM Benchmark57.9%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Math benchmarks for GLM 4.5 and Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking
BenchmarkGLM 4.5Qwen3 Next 80B A3B ThinkingLeader
AIME86.7%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
MATH 500 (Vals AI)94.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
MGSM (Vals AI)90.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
AA Math Index73.7Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)73.7%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: math14271399GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: mathematical work14301390GLM 4.5
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index40
Knowledge benchmarks for GLM 4.5 and Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking
BenchmarkGLM 4.5Qwen3 Next 80B A3B ThinkingLeader
MMLU Pro81.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)75.6%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)61.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)72.4%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
MedQA (Vals AI)90.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)83.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: science14441384GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14551392GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: legal and government14381364GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: business and finance14201360GLM 4.5
Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for GLM 4.5 and Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking
BenchmarkGLM 4.5Qwen3 Next 80B A3B ThinkingLeader
Design Arena: websites1169Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
Design Arena: UI components1141Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
Design Arena: game dev1144Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
Design Arena: data viz1159Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
Design Arena: 3D1170Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
Design Arena: all code categories1165Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
Design Arena: SVG1096Not measuredOnly 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 index170
General benchmarks for GLM 4.5 and Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking
BenchmarkGLM 4.5Qwen3 Next 80B A3B ThinkingLeader
IFBench44.1%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)52.7%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
Creative writing (Lech Mazur)73.4%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text14301368GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: instruction following14041344GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: creative writing13951314GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: English14371392GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: non-English14171342GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: Chinese14651407GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: German14071356GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: Japanese14151280GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: Korean13801310GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: French14181351GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: Spanish14541358GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: Russian14131337GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: Polish14221345GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: multi-turn14151346GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: longer queries14121353GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: writing and language14031330GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: entertainment and media14041312GLM 4.5
Neither model has a result on the other 26 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GLM 4.5 and Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking
BenchmarkGLM 4.5Qwen3 Next 80B A3B ThinkingLeader
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$0.0017Fits in one request
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking$0.0008Fits in one request

Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GLM 4.5$0.037Fits in one request
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking$0.011Fits in one request

Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GLM 4.5$0.142Exceeds the context window
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking$0.042Fits in one request

Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking 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 and Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking
SpecificationZ.ai GLM 4.5Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking
MakerZ.aiQwen
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedJuly 25, 2025September 11, 2025
Context window131K262K
Input $/Mtok$0.60$0.15
Output $/Mtok$2.20$1.20
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GLM 4.5 better than Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Compare them on price, context and the boards below.

Which is cheaper, GLM 4.5 or Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking?

GLM 4.5 costs $0.60 per million input tokens and $2.20 per million output tokens; Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking costs $0.15 and $1.20. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, GLM 4.5 or Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking?

Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking, with 262K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks is the GLM 4.5 vs Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking comparison based on?

29 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 Next 80B A3B Thinking's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next