Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GLM 4.6 vs Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507

GLM 4.6 leads Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 18.5 to 12.0, and Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 costs 2.8x less per output token ($0.775 vs $2.20 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 18 benchmarks have a result for both.

GLM 4.6Z.ai
Coding
8.8
Overall
33.4
Output $/M
$2.20
10
Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507Qwen
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.775
8
vs boards won of 18 shared

GLM 4.6 or Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507: which to pick

Only GLM 4.6 has a coding score, 8.8 on the Vibe Coding Index; Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 for output tokens 2.8x cheaper ($0.775 vs $2.20 per million) and a larger context window (262K against 205K tokens).

Shared results
18
GLM 4.6 only
52
Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 only
6
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 4.6 8.8 from 2 benchmarks, Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 not benchmarked.
Widest category
Agentic work, 22.0 points apart on average over 2 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
Design Arena: game dev: GLM 4.6 1150 against Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 951, 24.9 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GLM 4.6 $2.20 against Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 $0.775 per million output tokens, 2.8x apart.
Context window
GLM 4.6 takes 205K tokens, Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 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 4.6BarsQwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507Ties
Coding11
Intelligence10
Agentic work20
Reasoning02
Math02
Knowledge01
Web design60
General02
All shared boards108
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index11
Coding benchmarks for GLM 4.6 and Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507
BenchmarkGLM 4.6Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507Leader
SWE-bench Verified68.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena WebDev1341Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
AA Coding Index45.8Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)81.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)3.1%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)69.5%78.8%Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507
SciCodeNot measured41.4%Only Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)28.8%15.2%GLM 4.6
Terminal-Bench24.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
WeirdMLNot measured38.7%Only Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 measured
ALE-Bench340.8Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: coding1449Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1455Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML1350Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 29 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for GLM 4.6 and Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507
BenchmarkGLM 4.6Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507Leader
AA Intelligence Index18.512.0GLM 4.6
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Agentic work benchmarks for GLM 4.6 and Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507
BenchmarkGLM 4.6Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507Leader
Design Arena: agents building full-stack apps1029Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile apps1096Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Design Arena: agents building Android apps1084Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Design Arena: agents building Godot games1180Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
τ²-Bench Telecom76.9%53.2%GLM 4.6
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL)72.4%52.1%GLM 4.6
BrowseComp-Plus48.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 35 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Reasoning benchmarks for GLM 4.6 and Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507
BenchmarkGLM 4.6Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507Leader
GPQA Diamond74.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)78.0%79.0%Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)14.5%15.9%Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507
ARC-AGINot measured11.0%Only Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 measured
ARC-AGI-2Not measured1.3%Only Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts1440Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: expert1432Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English1445Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Kagi LLM Benchmark45.7%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 14 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Math benchmarks for GLM 4.6 and Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507
BenchmarkGLM 4.6Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507Leader
AIME92.7%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
MGSM (Vals AI)89.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
AA Math Index86.091.0Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)86.0%91.0%Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507
LMArena Text: math1432Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work1447Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
MathArena16.3%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Knowledge benchmarks for GLM 4.6 and Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507
BenchmarkGLM 4.6Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507Leader
MMLU Pro82.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)79.6%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)56.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)66.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
MedQA (Vals AI)92.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)82.9%84.3%Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507
LMArena Text: science1456Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare1455Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: legal and government1448Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: business and finance1416Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index60
Web design benchmarks for GLM 4.6 and Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507
BenchmarkGLM 4.6Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507Leader
Design Arena: websites11741058GLM 4.6
Design Arena: UI components1145963GLM 4.6
Design Arena: game dev1150951GLM 4.6
Design Arena: data viz11611070GLM 4.6
Design Arena: 3D1128994GLM 4.6
Design Arena: all code categories11651038GLM 4.6
Design Arena: SVG1108Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 2 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
General benchmarks for GLM 4.6 and Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507
BenchmarkGLM 4.6Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507Leader
IFBench43.4%51.2%Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)54.0%72.0%Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507
DTBenchNot measured78.4%Only Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 measured
LMCANot measured23.5%Only Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 measured
LMArena Text1440Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: instruction following1410Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: creative writing1412Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: English1449Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: non-English1426Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: Chinese1499Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: German1447Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: Japanese1393Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: Korean1400Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: French1459Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1436Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: Russian1418Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: Polish1447Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn1427Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: longer queries1422Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: writing and language1415Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media1409Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 27 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GLM 4.6 and Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507
BenchmarkGLM 4.6Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 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 4.6$0.0017Fits in one request
Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507$0.0005Fits in one request

Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GLM 4.6$0.037Fits in one request
Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507$0.0096Fits in one request

Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GLM 4.6$0.142Exceeds the context window
Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507$0.037Fits in one request

Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 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 4.6 and Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507
SpecificationZ.ai GLM 4.6Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507
MakerZ.aiQwen
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedSeptember 30, 2025July 21, 2025
Context window205K262K
Input $/Mtok$0.60$0.145
Output $/Mtok$2.20$0.775
Coding index8.8Not benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it20
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GLM 4.6 better than Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 for coding?

Only GLM 4.6 has a coding score, 8.8 on the Vibe Coding Index; Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 for output tokens 2.8x cheaper ($0.775 vs $2.20 per million) and a larger context window (262K against 205K tokens).

Which is cheaper, GLM 4.6 or Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507?

GLM 4.6 costs $0.60 per million input tokens and $2.20 per million output tokens; Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 costs $0.145 and $0.775. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, GLM 4.6 or Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507?

Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507, with 262K tokens against 205K.

How many benchmarks is the GLM 4.6 vs Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 comparison based on?

18 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. GLM 4.6's coding index rests on 2 independent benchmarks and Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next