GLM 5 Turbo vs Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking
GLM 5 Turbo leads Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 26.6 to 9.5, and Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking costs 4.0x less per output token ($1.00 vs $4.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 1 benchmarks have a result for both.
GLM 5 Turbo or Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking: which to pick
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Compare them on price, context and the boards below.
- Shared results
- 1
- GLM 5 Turbo only
- 15
- Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking only
- 0
- Like-for-like categories
- 1 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.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Neither has a coding score yet.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
GLM 5 Turbo
GLM 5 Turbo leads, 26.6 against 9.5.
Same board, both measured
Web design
Design Arena: websites
No call
Only GLM 5 Turbo has a Design Arena: websites result, 1262.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking
Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking takes 262K tokens against 203K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking
GLM 5 Turbo $0.0032, Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking $0.0008 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- GLM 5 Turbo not benchmarked, Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking not benchmarked.
- Widest category
- Intelligence, 17.1 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
- Widest single gap
- AA Intelligence Index: GLM 5 Turbo 26.6 against Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking 9.5, 17.1 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- GLM 5 Turbo $4.00 against Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking $1.00 per million output tokens, 4.0x apart.
- Context window
- GLM 5 Turbo takes 203K tokens, Qwen3 VL 30B 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.
| Category | GLM 5 Turbo | Bars | Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence | 1 | 0 | ||
| All shared boards | 1 | 0 |
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index2 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GLM 5 Turbo | Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | 33.3% | Not measured | Only GLM 5 Turbo measured |
| ALE-Bench | 634.0 | Not measured | Only GLM 5 Turbo measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 41 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
| Benchmark | GLM 5 Turbo | Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 26.6 | 9.5 | GLM 5 Turbo |
| 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
| Benchmark | GLM 5 Turbo | Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| τ²-Bench Telecom | 98.5% | Not measured | Only GLM 5 Turbo measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 41 boards here | |||
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GLM 5 Turbo | Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 84.7% | Not measured | Only GLM 5 Turbo measured |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 27.8% | Not measured | Only GLM 5 Turbo measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 21 boards here | |||
MathNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GLM 5 Turbo | Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 14 boards here | |||
KnowledgeNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GLM 5 Turbo | Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 20 boards here | |||
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GLM 5 Turbo | Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: websites | 1262 | Not measured | Only GLM 5 Turbo measured |
| Design Arena: UI components | 1260 | Not measured | Only GLM 5 Turbo measured |
| Design Arena: game dev | 1248 | Not measured | Only GLM 5 Turbo measured |
| Design Arena: data viz | 1264 | Not measured | Only GLM 5 Turbo measured |
| Design Arena: 3D | 1247 | Not measured | Only GLM 5 Turbo measured |
| Design Arena: all code categories | 1261 | Not measured | Only GLM 5 Turbo measured |
| Design Arena: SVG | 1205 | Not measured | Only GLM 5 Turbo measured |
| Design Arena: ASCII art | 1160 | Not measured | Only GLM 5 Turbo measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here | |||
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GLM 5 Turbo | Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| IFBench | 73.2% | Not measured | Only GLM 5 Turbo measured |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 71.7% | Not measured | Only GLM 5 Turbo measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 46 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GLM 5 Turbo | Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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
Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Qwen3 VL 30B 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.
| Specification | Z.ai GLM 5 Turbo | Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Z.ai | Qwen |
| Weights | No public weights listed | Open weights |
| Released | March 15, 2026 | October 6, 2025 |
| Context window | 203K | 262K |
| Input $/Mtok | $1.20 | $0.29 |
| Output $/Mtok | $4.00 | $1.00 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | Not benchmarked |
| Independent measurements behind it | 0 | 0 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is GLM 5 Turbo better than Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking for coding?
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Compare them on price, context and the boards below.
Which is cheaper, GLM 5 Turbo or Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking?
GLM 5 Turbo costs $1.20 per million input tokens and $4.00 per million output tokens; Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking costs $0.29 and $1.00. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, GLM 5 Turbo or Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking?
Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking, with 262K tokens against 203K.
How many benchmarks is the GLM 5 Turbo vs Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking comparison based on?
1 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. GLM 5 Turbo's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.