LLMBenchmark.ai

Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GLM 4.6 vs Qwen3.8 Flash

Updated October 21, 2026. 0 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.

GLM 4.6Z.ai
Coding
52.2
Overall
18.5
Output $/M
$2.20
0
Qwen3.8 FlashQwen
Coding
87.4
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.47
0
vs No board has a result for both

Decision reading

GLM 4.6 scores 52.2 and Qwen3.8 Flash 87.4 on the Vibe Coding Index, but no coding benchmark measured both, so the gap is directional, not a ranking.

Pick Qwen3.8 Flash when output tokens cost 4.7x less, or when the context window is larger, 1M against 205K tokens.

Shared results
0
GLM 4.6 only
66
Qwen3.8 Flash only
7
Like-for-like categories
0 of 9

Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results only one model has describe coverage, not superiority.

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 52.2 from 2 benchmarks, Qwen3.8 Flash 87.4 from 1 benchmark.
Widest category
No category has a result for both models.
Widest single gap
No benchmark has a result for both models.
Output price
GLM 4.6 $2.20 against Qwen3.8 Flash $0.47 per million output tokens, 4.7x apart.
Context window
GLM 4.6 takes 205K tokens, Qwen3.8 Flash 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.

CodingDirectional onlyFour of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index13 boards, none shared
Coding benchmarks for GLM 4.6 and Qwen3.8 Flash
BenchmarkGLM 4.6Qwen3.8 FlashLeader
SWE-bench Verified68.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LiveBench codingNot measured87.4%Only Qwen3.8 Flash 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%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)28.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Terminal-Bench24.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 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 25 boards here
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
Intelligence benchmarks for GLM 4.6 and Qwen3.8 Flash
BenchmarkGLM 4.6Qwen3.8 FlashLeader
AA Intelligence Index18.5Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for GLM 4.6 and Qwen3.8 Flash
BenchmarkGLM 4.6Qwen3.8 FlashLeader
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 apps1090Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Design Arena: agents building Godot games1180Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LiveBench researchNot measured74.6%Only Qwen3.8 Flash measured
LiveBench browserNot measured48.0%Only Qwen3.8 Flash measured
LiveBench long agenticNot measured37.1%Only Qwen3.8 Flash measured
τ²-Bench Telecom76.9%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 31 boards here
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
Reasoning benchmarks for GLM 4.6 and Qwen3.8 Flash
BenchmarkGLM 4.6Qwen3.8 FlashLeader
GPQA Diamond74.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LiveBench reasoningNot measured87.4%Only Qwen3.8 Flash measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)78.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)14.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 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
Neither model has a result on the other 14 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for GLM 4.6 and Qwen3.8 Flash
BenchmarkGLM 4.6Qwen3.8 FlashLeader
AIME92.7%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
MGSM (Vals AI)89.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
AA Math Index86.0Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)86.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: math1432Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work1447Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for GLM 4.6 and Qwen3.8 Flash
BenchmarkGLM 4.6Qwen3.8 FlashLeader
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%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
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 7 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for GLM 4.6 and Qwen3.8 Flash
BenchmarkGLM 4.6Qwen3.8 FlashLeader
Design Arena: websites1174Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Design Arena: UI components1147Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Design Arena: game dev1151Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Design Arena: data viz1161Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Design Arena: 3D1129Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Design Arena: all code categories1166Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Design Arena: SVG1108Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LiveBench designNot measured72.8%Only Qwen3.8 Flash measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20 boards, none shared
General benchmarks for GLM 4.6 and Qwen3.8 Flash
BenchmarkGLM 4.6Qwen3.8 FlashLeader
LiveBench data analysisNot measured74.2%Only Qwen3.8 Flash measured
IFBench43.4%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)54.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 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 26 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 Qwen3.8 Flash
BenchmarkGLM 4.6Qwen3.8 FlashLeader
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$0.0016Fits in one request
Qwen3.8 Flash$0.0004Fits in one request

Qwen3.8 Flash costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GLM 4.6$0.034Fits in one request
Qwen3.8 Flash$0.0089Fits in one request

Qwen3.8 Flash costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GLM 4.6$0.132Exceeds the context window
Qwen3.8 Flash$0.035Fits in one request

Qwen3.8 Flash 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 Qwen3.8 Flash
SpecificationZ.ai GLM 4.6Qwen3.8 Flash
MakerZ.aiQwen
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedSeptember 30, 2025August 26, 2026
Context window205K1M
Input $/Mtok$0.55$0.15
Output $/Mtok$2.20$0.47
Coding index52.287.4
Independent measurements behind it21
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GLM 4.6 better than Qwen3.8 Flash for coding?

GLM 4.6 scores 52.2 and Qwen3.8 Flash 87.4 on the Vibe Coding Index, but no coding benchmark measured both, so the gap is directional, not a ranking. Pick Qwen3.8 Flash when output tokens cost 4.7x less, or when the context window is larger, 1M against 205K tokens.

Which is cheaper, GLM 4.6 or Qwen3.8 Flash?

GLM 4.6 costs $0.55 per million input tokens and $2.20 per million output tokens; Qwen3.8 Flash costs $0.15 and $0.47. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, GLM 4.6 or Qwen3.8 Flash?

Qwen3.8 Flash, with 1M tokens against 205K.

How many benchmarks is the GLM 4.6 vs Qwen3.8 Flash comparison based on?

0 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. GLM 4.6's coding index rests on 2 independent benchmarks and Qwen3.8 Flash's on 1. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next