Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GLM 4.6V vs Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking

GLM 4.6V and Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking tie on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index at 11.2, and GLM 4.6V costs 1.3x less per output token ($0.90 vs $1.20 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 21 benchmarks have a result for both.

GLM 4.6VZ.ai
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.90
14
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B ThinkingQwen
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$1.20
6
vs boards won of 21 shared, 1 tied

GLM 4.6V or Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking: which to pick

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

Pick GLM 4.6V for output tokens 1.3x cheaper ($0.90 vs $1.20 per million) and work measured by LMArena Text: coding or LMArena Text: software and IT, where it leads.

Shared results
21
GLM 4.6V only
17
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking only
9
Like-for-like categories
5 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 4.6V not benchmarked, Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking not benchmarked.
Widest category
General, 2.3 points apart on average over 11 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
LMArena Text: creative writing: GLM 4.6V 1347 against Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking 1314, 5.5 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GLM 4.6V $0.90 against Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking $1.20 per million output tokens, 1.3x apart.
Context window
GLM 4.6V 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 4.6VBarsQwen3 Next 80B A3B ThinkingTies
Coding02
Intelligence001 tie
Reasoning12
Knowledge22
General110
All shared boards1461 tie
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index02
Coding benchmarks for GLM 4.6V and Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking
BenchmarkGLM 4.6VQwen3 Next 80B A3B ThinkingLeader
AA Coding IndexNot measured17.4Only Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)41.1%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6V measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)14.4%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6V measured
LMArena Text: coding13891392Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking
LMArena Text: software and IT13911393Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking
Neither model has a result on the other 34 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index00
Intelligence benchmarks for GLM 4.6V and Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking
BenchmarkGLM 4.6VQwen3 Next 80B A3B ThinkingLeader
AA Intelligence Index11.211.2Tie
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 4.6V and Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking
BenchmarkGLM 4.6VQwen3 Next 80B A3B ThinkingLeader
τ²-Bench Telecom31.6%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6V measured
Neither model has a result on the other 40 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index12
Reasoning benchmarks for GLM 4.6V and Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking
BenchmarkGLM 4.6VQwen3 Next 80B A3B ThinkingLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)71.9%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6V measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)9.6%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6V measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts13671371Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking
LMArena Text: expert13711376Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English13911384GLM 4.6V
LMArena Vision: diagrams1182Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6V measured
LMArena Vision: homework1155Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6V measured
Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for GLM 4.6V and Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking
BenchmarkGLM 4.6VQwen3 Next 80B A3B ThinkingLeader
AA Math Index85.3Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6V measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)85.3%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6V measured
LMArena Text: mathNot measured1399Only Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking measured
LMArena Text: mathematical workNot measured1390Only Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking measured
Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index22
Knowledge benchmarks for GLM 4.6V and Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking
BenchmarkGLM 4.6VQwen3 Next 80B A3B ThinkingLeader
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)79.9%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6V measured
LMArena Text: science13891384GLM 4.6V
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare13891392Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking
LMArena Text: legal and government13931364GLM 4.6V
LMArena Text: business and finance13591360Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking
Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for GLM 4.6V and Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking
BenchmarkGLM 4.6VQwen3 Next 80B A3B ThinkingLeader
Neither model has a result on 9 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index110
General benchmarks for GLM 4.6V and Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking
BenchmarkGLM 4.6VQwen3 Next 80B A3B ThinkingLeader
IFBench30.1%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6V measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)48.7%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6V measured
LMArena Text13761368GLM 4.6V
LMArena Text: instruction following13501344GLM 4.6V
LMArena Text: creative writing13471314GLM 4.6V
LMArena Vision1164Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6V measured
LMArena Text: English13951392GLM 4.6V
LMArena Text: non-English13581342GLM 4.6V
LMArena Text: Chinese14251407GLM 4.6V
LMArena Text: GermanNot measured1356Only Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking measured
LMArena Text: JapaneseNot measured1280Only Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking measured
LMArena Text: KoreanNot measured1310Only Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking measured
LMArena Text: FrenchNot measured1351Only Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking measured
LMArena Text: SpanishNot measured1358Only Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking measured
LMArena Text: Russian13391337GLM 4.6V
LMArena Text: PolishNot measured1345Only Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn13591346GLM 4.6V
LMArena Text: longer queries13571353GLM 4.6V
LMArena Text: writing and language13471330GLM 4.6V
LMArena Text: entertainment and media13431312GLM 4.6V
LMArena Vision: English1179Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6V measured
LMArena Vision: Chinese1217Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6V measured
LMArena Vision: reading text1171Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6V measured
LMArena Vision: creative writing1113Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6V measured
Neither model has a result on the other 22 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GLM 4.6V and Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking
BenchmarkGLM 4.6VQwen3 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 4.6V$0.0008Fits in one request
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking$0.0008Fits in one request

Same cost

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GLM 4.6V$0.018Fits 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 4.6V$0.069Exceeds 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 4.6V and Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking
SpecificationZ.ai GLM 4.6VQwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking
MakerZ.aiQwen
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedDecember 8, 2025September 11, 2025
Context window131K262K
Input $/Mtok$0.30$0.15
Output $/Mtok$0.90$1.20
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GLM 4.6V better than Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick GLM 4.6V for output tokens 1.3x cheaper ($0.90 vs $1.20 per million) and work measured by LMArena Text: coding or LMArena Text: software and IT, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, GLM 4.6V or Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking?

GLM 4.6V costs $0.30 per million input tokens and $0.90 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 4.6V or Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking?

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

How many benchmarks is the GLM 4.6V vs Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking comparison based on?

21 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. GLM 4.6V'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