Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GLM 5 Turbo vs Step 3.7 Flash

GLM 5 Turbo leads Step 3.7 Flash on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 26.6 to 19.5, and Step 3.7 Flash costs 3.5x less per output token ($1.15 vs $4.00 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 16 benchmarks have a result for both.

Replace GLM 5 Turbo Replace Step 3.7 Flash
GLM 5 TurboZ.ai
Coding
No data
Overall
26.6
Output $/M
$4.00
12
Step 3.7 FlashStepFun
Coding
No data
Overall
19.5
Output $/M
$1.15
3
vs boards won of 16 shared, 1 tied

GLM 5 Turbo or Step 3.7 Flash: which to pick

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

Pick GLM 5 Turbo for work measured by Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) or ALE-Bench, where it leads.

Model AGLM 5 TurboZ.aiNot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved taskModel BStep 3.7 FlashStepFunNot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved task
Shared results
16
GLM 5 Turbo only
0
Step 3.7 Flash only
2
Like-for-like categories
6 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 5 Turbo not benchmarked, Step 3.7 Flash not benchmarked.
Widest category
Web design, 10.3 points apart on average over 8 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
Design Arena: SVG: GLM 5 Turbo 1206 against Step 3.7 Flash 1085, 15.1 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GLM 5 Turbo $4.00 against Step 3.7 Flash $1.15 per million output tokens, 3.5x apart.
Context window
GLM 5 Turbo takes 203K tokens, Step 3.7 Flash 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 5 TurboBarsStep 3.7 FlashTies
Coding02
Intelligence10
Agentic work001 tie
Reasoning20
Web design80
General11
All shared boards1231 tie
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index02
Coding benchmarks for GLM 5 Turbo and Step 3.7 Flash
BenchmarkGLM 5 TurboStep 3.7 FlashLeader
AA Coding IndexNot measured39.6Only Step 3.7 Flash measured
SciCodeNot measured43.9%Only Step 3.7 Flash measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)33.3%35.6%Step 3.7 Flash
ALE-Bench634.0694.1Step 3.7 Flash
Neither model has a result on the other 34 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for GLM 5 Turbo and Step 3.7 Flash
BenchmarkGLM 5 TurboStep 3.7 FlashLeader
AA Intelligence Index26.619.5GLM 5 Turbo
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index00
Agentic work benchmarks for GLM 5 Turbo and Step 3.7 Flash
BenchmarkGLM 5 TurboStep 3.7 FlashLeader
τ²-Bench Telecom98.5%98.5%Tie
Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Reasoning benchmarks for GLM 5 Turbo and Step 3.7 Flash
BenchmarkGLM 5 TurboStep 3.7 FlashLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)84.7%80.9%GLM 5 Turbo
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)27.8%21.4%GLM 5 Turbo
Neither model has a result on the other 19 boards here
MathNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for GLM 5 Turbo and Step 3.7 Flash
BenchmarkGLM 5 TurboStep 3.7 FlashLeader
Neither model has a result on 13 boards here
KnowledgeNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for GLM 5 Turbo and Step 3.7 Flash
BenchmarkGLM 5 TurboStep 3.7 FlashLeader
Neither model has a result on 17 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index80
Web design benchmarks for GLM 5 Turbo and Step 3.7 Flash
BenchmarkGLM 5 TurboStep 3.7 FlashLeader
Design Arena: websites12621196GLM 5 Turbo
Design Arena: UI components12631179GLM 5 Turbo
Design Arena: game dev12481158GLM 5 Turbo
Design Arena: data viz12641172GLM 5 Turbo
Design Arena: 3D12481129GLM 5 Turbo
Design Arena: all code categories12621182GLM 5 Turbo
Design Arena: SVG12061085GLM 5 Turbo
Design Arena: ASCII art11601152GLM 5 Turbo
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index11
General benchmarks for GLM 5 Turbo and Step 3.7 Flash
BenchmarkGLM 5 TurboStep 3.7 FlashLeader
IFBench73.2%67.3%GLM 5 Turbo
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)71.7%73.7%Step 3.7 Flash
Neither model has a result on the other 44 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GLM 5 Turbo and Step 3.7 Flash
BenchmarkGLM 5 TurboStep 3.7 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 5 Turbo$0.0032Fits in one request
Step 3.7 Flash$0.0008Fits in one request

Step 3.7 Flash costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GLM 5 Turbo$0.072Fits in one request
Step 3.7 Flash$0.013Fits in one request

Step 3.7 Flash costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GLM 5 Turbo$0.280Exceeds the context window
Step 3.7 Flash$0.051Fits in one request

Step 3.7 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 5 Turbo and Step 3.7 Flash
SpecificationZ.ai GLM 5 TurboStepFun Step 3.7 Flash
MakerZ.aiStepFun
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedMarch 15, 2026May 28, 2026
Context window203K262K
Input $/Mtok$1.20$0.20
Output $/Mtok$4.00$1.15
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GLM 5 Turbo better than Step 3.7 Flash for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick GLM 5 Turbo for work measured by Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) or ALE-Bench, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, GLM 5 Turbo or Step 3.7 Flash?

GLM 5 Turbo costs $1.20 per million input tokens and $4.00 per million output tokens; Step 3.7 Flash costs $0.20 and $1.15. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, GLM 5 Turbo or Step 3.7 Flash?

Step 3.7 Flash, with 262K tokens against 203K.

How many benchmarks is the GLM 5 Turbo vs Step 3.7 Flash comparison based on?

16 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. GLM 5 Turbo's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Step 3.7 Flash's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next