Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GLM 4.7 Flash vs GPT-3.5 Turbo 16k

GLM 4.7 Flash costs 10.0x less per output token than GPT-3.5 Turbo 16k ($0.40 vs $4.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; no benchmark has tested both models yet.

GLM 4.7 FlashZ.ai
Coding
No data
Overall
42.1
Output $/M
$0.40
GPT-3.5 Turbo 16kOpenAI
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$4.00
vs $0.40 vs $4.00 per 1M output tokens. GLM 4.7 Flash is 10.0x cheaper.

GLM 4.7 Flash or GPT-3.5 Turbo 16k: which to pick

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

Pick GLM 4.7 Flash for output tokens 10.0x cheaper ($0.40 vs $4.00 per million) and a larger context window (200K against 16K tokens).

No benchmark has tested both yet. GLM 4.7 Flash has results on Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run), LMArena Text: coding and LMArena Text: software and IT; GPT-3.5 Turbo 16k has none yet. Compare them on price and context instead.

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 4.7 Flash not benchmarked, GPT-3.5 Turbo 16k not benchmarked.
Widest category
None yet: no category has been tested on both models.
Widest single gap
None yet: no benchmark has tested both models.
Output price
GLM 4.7 Flash $0.40 against GPT-3.5 Turbo 16k $4.00 per million output tokens, 10.0x apart.
Context window
GLM 4.7 Flash takes 200K tokens, GPT-3.5 Turbo 16k 16K.

Benchmark by benchmark

Every board either model has a result on, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale. Only one model is measured on each, so no row names a leader.

CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index3 boards measured
Coding benchmarks for GLM 4.7 Flash and GPT-3.5 Turbo 16k
BenchmarkGLM 4.7 FlashGPT-3.5 Turbo 16kLeader
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)22.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: coding1382Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1389Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
Neither model has a result on the other 40 boards here
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board measured
Intelligence benchmarks for GLM 4.7 Flash and GPT-3.5 Turbo 16k
BenchmarkGLM 4.7 FlashGPT-3.5 Turbo 16kLeader
AA Intelligence Index14.9Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board measured
Agentic work benchmarks for GLM 4.7 Flash and GPT-3.5 Turbo 16k
BenchmarkGLM 4.7 FlashGPT-3.5 Turbo 16kLeader
τ²-Bench Telecom98.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
Neither model has a result on the other 41 boards here
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards measured
Reasoning benchmarks for GLM 4.7 Flash and GPT-3.5 Turbo 16k
BenchmarkGLM 4.7 FlashGPT-3.5 Turbo 16kLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)58.1%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)7.6%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)60.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts1356Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: expert1357Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English1369Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
Neither model has a result on the other 17 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index3 boards measured
Math benchmarks for GLM 4.7 Flash and GPT-3.5 Turbo 16k
BenchmarkGLM 4.7 FlashGPT-3.5 Turbo 16kLeader
OTIS Mock AIME58.3%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: math1355Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work1369Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards measured
Knowledge benchmarks for GLM 4.7 Flash and GPT-3.5 Turbo 16k
BenchmarkGLM 4.7 FlashGPT-3.5 Turbo 16kLeader
LMArena Text: science1358Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare1343Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: legal and government1357Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: business and finance1343Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards measured
Web design benchmarks for GLM 4.7 Flash and GPT-3.5 Turbo 16k
BenchmarkGLM 4.7 FlashGPT-3.5 Turbo 16kLeader
Design Arena: websites1194Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
Design Arena: UI components1205Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
Design Arena: game dev1134Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
Design Arena: data viz1123Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
Design Arena: 3D1120Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
Design Arena: all code categories1177Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
Design Arena: SVG1037Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
Neither model has a result on the other 2 boards here
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index18 boards measured
General benchmarks for GLM 4.7 Flash and GPT-3.5 Turbo 16k
BenchmarkGLM 4.7 FlashGPT-3.5 Turbo 16kLeader
IFBench60.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)41.7%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text1351Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: instruction following1327Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: creative writing1296Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: English1373Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: non-English1330Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: Chinese1403Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: German1336Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: Korean1283Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: French1332Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1350Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: Russian1333Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: Polish1291Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn1342Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: longer queries1345Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: writing and language1320Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media1304Not measuredOnly GLM 4.7 Flash measured
Neither model has a result on the other 30 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 4.7 Flash$0.0003Fits in one request
GPT-3.5 Turbo 16k$0.0050Fits in one request

GLM 4.7 Flash costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GLM 4.7 Flash$0.0045Fits in one request
GPT-3.5 Turbo 16k$0.162Exceeds the context window

GLM 4.7 Flash costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GLM 4.7 Flash$0.017Exceeds the context window
GPT-3.5 Turbo 16k$0.640Exceeds the context window

GLM 4.7 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 4.7 Flash and GPT-3.5 Turbo 16k
SpecificationZ.ai GLM 4.7 FlashOpenAI GPT-3.5 Turbo 16k
MakerZ.aiOpenAI
WeightsOpen weightsNo public weights listed
ReleasedJanuary 19, 2026August 28, 2023
Context window200K16K
Input $/Mtok$0.0653$3.00
Output $/Mtok$0.40$4.00
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GLM 4.7 Flash better than GPT-3.5 Turbo 16k for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick GLM 4.7 Flash for output tokens 10.0x cheaper ($0.40 vs $4.00 per million) and a larger context window (200K against 16K tokens).

Which is cheaper, GLM 4.7 Flash or GPT-3.5 Turbo 16k?

GLM 4.7 Flash costs $0.0653 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; GPT-3.5 Turbo 16k costs $3.00 and $4.00. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, GLM 4.7 Flash or GPT-3.5 Turbo 16k?

GLM 4.7 Flash, with 200K tokens against 16K.

Has any benchmark tested both GLM 4.7 Flash and GPT-3.5 Turbo 16k?

No benchmark has tested both yet. GLM 4.7 Flash has results on Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run), LMArena Text: coding and LMArena Text: software and IT; GPT-3.5 Turbo 16k has none yet. Compare them on price and context instead. Data as of October 22, 2026.

Compare next