Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GLM 4.5V vs Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507

Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 leads GLM 4.5V on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 12.7 to 7.6, and GLM 4.5V costs 1.9x less per output token ($1.80 vs $3.50 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 25 benchmarks have a result for both.

GLM 4.5VZ.ai
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$1.80
0
Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Qwen
Coding
No data
Overall
52.9
Output $/M
$3.50
25
vs boards won of 25 shared

GLM 4.5V 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 4.5V for output tokens 1.9x cheaper ($1.80 vs $3.50 per million) and work measured by LMArena Text: coding or LMArena Text: software and IT, where it leads.

Shared results
25
GLM 4.5V only
16
Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 only
21
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 4.5V not benchmarked, Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 not benchmarked.
Widest category
Knowledge, 16.3 points apart on average over 4 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
LMArena Text: Chinese: GLM 4.5V 1337 against Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 1481, 24.0 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GLM 4.5V $1.80 against Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 $3.50 per million output tokens, 1.9x apart.
Context window
GLM 4.5V takes 66K 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.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryGLM 4.5VBarsQwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Ties
Coding02
Intelligence01
Reasoning03
Math02
Knowledge04
General013
All shared boards025
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index02
Coding benchmarks for GLM 4.5V and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
BenchmarkGLM 4.5VQwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Leader
AA Coding IndexNot measured22.1Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)60.4%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5V measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)6.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5V measured
WeirdMLNot measured41.0%Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
LMArena Text: coding13471424Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
LMArena Text: software and IT13531431Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
Neither model has a result on the other 33 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for GLM 4.5V and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
BenchmarkGLM 4.5VQwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Leader
AA Intelligence Index7.612.7Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
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
Agentic work benchmarks for GLM 4.5V and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
BenchmarkGLM 4.5VQwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Leader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured1.3Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
τ²-Bench Telecom22.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5V measured
Vending-Bench 2Not measured-$11Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index03
Reasoning benchmarks for GLM 4.5V and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
BenchmarkGLM 4.5VQwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Leader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)68.4%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5V measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)6.3%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5V measured
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)Not measured80.1%Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
Mystery game puzzlesNot measured9.0%Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts13351416Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
LMArena Text: expert13531463Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English13571432Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
LMArena Vision: diagrams1151Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5V measured
LMArena Vision: homework1163Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5V measured
Kagi LLM Benchmark59.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5V 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 4.5V and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
BenchmarkGLM 4.5VQwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Leader
AA Math Index73.0Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5V measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)73.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5V measured
OTIS Mock AIMENot measured86.7%Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
LMArena Text: math13541412Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
LMArena Text: mathematical work13361435Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
Knowledge benchmarks for GLM 4.5V and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
BenchmarkGLM 4.5VQwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Leader
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)78.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5V measured
SimpleQA VerifiedNot measured40.4%Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
LMArena Text: science13301433Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare13491456Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
LMArena Text: legal and government13381415Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
LMArena Text: business and finance13091413Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for GLM 4.5V and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
BenchmarkGLM 4.5VQwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Leader
Design Arena: websitesNot measured1052Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
Design Arena: UI componentsNot measured942Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
Design Arena: game devNot measured956Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
Design Arena: data vizNot measured950Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
Design Arena: 3DNot measured997Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
Design Arena: all code categoriesNot measured1032Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index013
General benchmarks for GLM 4.5V and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
BenchmarkGLM 4.5VQwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Leader
IFBench34.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5V measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)0.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5V measured
DTBenchNot measured80.3%Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
LMCANot measured29.3%Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
Fiction.LiveBenchNot measured75.0%Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
Creative writing (Lech Mazur)Not measured82.4%Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
LMArena Text13331415Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
LMArena Text: instruction following13111386Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
LMArena Text: creative writing12941384Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
LMArena Vision1154Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5V measured
LMArena Text: English13621429Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
LMArena Text: non-English13031397Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
LMArena Text: Chinese13371481Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
LMArena Text: GermanNot measured1408Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
LMArena Text: JapaneseNot measured1386Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
LMArena Text: KoreanNot measured1375Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
LMArena Text: Spanish13361389Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
LMArena Text: Russian12981401Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
LMArena Text: Polish13021390Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
LMArena Text: multi-turn13331406Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
LMArena Text: longer queries13051400Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
LMArena Text: writing and language13021388Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
LMArena Text: entertainment and media13031370Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
LMArena Vision: English1183Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5V measured
LMArena Vision: reading text1151Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5V measured
Neither model has a result on the other 21 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GLM 4.5V and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
BenchmarkGLM 4.5VQwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Leader
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 4.5V$0.0015Fits in one request
Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507$0.0022Fits in one request

GLM 4.5V costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GLM 4.5V$0.035Fits in one request
Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507$0.033Fits in one request

Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GLM 4.5V$0.138Exceeds the context window
Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507$0.125Exceeds the context window

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.

Specifications of GLM 4.5V and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
SpecificationZ.ai GLM 4.5VQwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
MakerZ.aiQwen
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedAugust 11, 2025July 25, 2025
Context window66K128K
Input $/Mtok$0.60$0.45
Output $/Mtok$1.80$3.50
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GLM 4.5V 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 4.5V for output tokens 1.9x cheaper ($1.80 vs $3.50 per million) and work measured by LMArena Text: coding or LMArena Text: software and IT, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, GLM 4.5V or Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507?

GLM 4.5V costs $0.60 per million input tokens and $1.80 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 4.5V or Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507?

Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507, with 128K tokens against 66K.

How many benchmarks is the GLM 4.5V vs Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 comparison based on?

25 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. GLM 4.5V'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.

Compare next