Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GLM 5V Turbo vs Step 3.5 Flash

GLM 5V Turbo leads Step 3.5 Flash on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 23.5 to 17.0, and Step 3.5 Flash costs 13.3x less per output token ($0.30 vs $4.00 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 34 benchmarks have a result for both.

GLM 5V TurboZ.ai
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$4.00
30
Step 3.5 FlashStepFun
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.30
3
vs boards won of 34 shared, 1 tied

GLM 5V Turbo or Step 3.5 Flash: which to pick

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

Pick GLM 5V Turbo for work measured by GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) or Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run), where it leads.

Shared results
34
GLM 5V Turbo only
31
Step 3.5 Flash only
1
Like-for-like categories
7 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 5V Turbo not benchmarked, Step 3.5 Flash not benchmarked.
Widest category
Intelligence, 6.5 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
LMArena Text: creative writing: GLM 5V Turbo 1417 against Step 3.5 Flash 1357, 10.0 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GLM 5V Turbo $4.00 against Step 3.5 Flash $0.30 per million output tokens, 13.3x apart.
Context window
GLM 5V Turbo takes 203K tokens, Step 3.5 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 5V TurboBarsStep 3.5 FlashTies
Coding201 tie
Intelligence10
Agentic work10
Reasoning32
Math20
Knowledge40
General171
All shared boards3031 tie
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index20
Coding benchmarks for GLM 5V Turbo and Step 3.5 Flash
BenchmarkGLM 5V TurboStep 3.5 FlashLeader
LMArena WebDev1402Not measuredOnly GLM 5V Turbo measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)32.6%32.6%Tie
LMArena Text: coding14661436GLM 5V Turbo
LMArena Text: software and IT14601434GLM 5V Turbo
LMArena WebDev: React1386Not measuredOnly GLM 5V Turbo measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML1356Not measuredOnly GLM 5V Turbo measured
LMArena WebDev: from an image1425Not measuredOnly GLM 5V Turbo measured
Neither model has a result on the other 32 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for GLM 5V Turbo and Step 3.5 Flash
BenchmarkGLM 5V TurboStep 3.5 FlashLeader
AA Intelligence Index23.517.0GLM 5V Turbo
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Agentic work benchmarks for GLM 5V Turbo and Step 3.5 Flash
BenchmarkGLM 5V TurboStep 3.5 FlashLeader
Design Arena: agents building web apps1124Not measuredOnly GLM 5V Turbo measured
Design Arena: agents building full-stack apps1149Not measuredOnly GLM 5V Turbo measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile apps1134Not measuredOnly GLM 5V Turbo measured
Design Arena: agents building Android apps1267Not measuredOnly GLM 5V Turbo measured
Design Arena: agents building Godot games957Not measuredOnly GLM 5V Turbo measured
Design Arena: agents building games1102Not measuredOnly GLM 5V Turbo measured
Design Arena: HTML slides1120Not measuredOnly GLM 5V Turbo measured
Design Arena: PowerPoint slides1152Not measuredOnly GLM 5V Turbo measured
τ²-Bench Telecom98.5%94.4%GLM 5V Turbo
Neither model has a result on the other 32 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index32
Reasoning benchmarks for GLM 5V Turbo and Step 3.5 Flash
BenchmarkGLM 5V TurboStep 3.5 FlashLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)80.9%83.1%Step 3.5 Flash
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)17.1%24.5%Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text: hard prompts14431411GLM 5V Turbo
LMArena Text: expert14531421GLM 5V Turbo
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English14561421GLM 5V Turbo
LMArena Vision: diagrams1286Not measuredOnly GLM 5V Turbo measured
LMArena Vision: homework1273Not measuredOnly GLM 5V Turbo measured
Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Math benchmarks for GLM 5V Turbo and Step 3.5 Flash
BenchmarkGLM 5V TurboStep 3.5 FlashLeader
LMArena Text: math14421408GLM 5V Turbo
LMArena Text: mathematical work14471421GLM 5V Turbo
Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index40
Knowledge benchmarks for GLM 5V Turbo and Step 3.5 Flash
BenchmarkGLM 5V TurboStep 3.5 FlashLeader
LMArena Text: science14481415GLM 5V Turbo
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14331408GLM 5V Turbo
LMArena Text: legal and government14361408GLM 5V Turbo
LMArena Text: business and finance14351394GLM 5V Turbo
Neither model has a result on the other 14 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for GLM 5V Turbo and Step 3.5 Flash
BenchmarkGLM 5V TurboStep 3.5 FlashLeader
Design Arena: websites1230Not measuredOnly GLM 5V Turbo measured
Design Arena: UI components1213Not measuredOnly GLM 5V Turbo measured
Design Arena: game dev1219Not measuredOnly GLM 5V Turbo measured
Design Arena: data viz1202Not measuredOnly GLM 5V Turbo measured
Design Arena: 3D1209Not measuredOnly GLM 5V Turbo measured
Design Arena: all code categories1228Not measuredOnly GLM 5V Turbo measured
Design Arena: SVG1151Not measuredOnly GLM 5V Turbo measured
Design Arena: ASCII art1117Not measuredOnly GLM 5V Turbo measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index171
General benchmarks for GLM 5V Turbo and Step 3.5 Flash
BenchmarkGLM 5V TurboStep 3.5 FlashLeader
IFBench61.1%66.5%Step 3.5 Flash
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)70.3%63.0%GLM 5V Turbo
LMArena Text14371403GLM 5V Turbo
LMArena Text: instruction following14231385GLM 5V Turbo
LMArena Text: creative writing14171357GLM 5V Turbo
LMArena Vision1264Not measuredOnly GLM 5V Turbo measured
LMArena Text: English14541417GLM 5V Turbo
LMArena Text: non-English14201385GLM 5V Turbo
LMArena Text: Chinese14911446GLM 5V Turbo
LMArena Text: German14221405GLM 5V Turbo
LMArena Text: JapaneseNot measured1353Only Step 3.5 Flash measured
LMArena Text: Korean13971351GLM 5V Turbo
LMArena Text: French14431421GLM 5V Turbo
LMArena Text: Spanish14521419GLM 5V Turbo
LMArena Text: Russian14321385GLM 5V Turbo
LMArena Text: Polish14321389GLM 5V Turbo
LMArena Text: multi-turn14311404GLM 5V Turbo
LMArena Text: longer queries14381402GLM 5V Turbo
LMArena Text: writing and language14201372GLM 5V Turbo
LMArena Text: entertainment and media14071360GLM 5V Turbo
LMArena Vision: English1274Not measuredOnly GLM 5V Turbo measured
LMArena Vision: Chinese1329Not measuredOnly GLM 5V Turbo measured
LMArena Vision: reading text1270Not measuredOnly GLM 5V Turbo measured
LMArena Vision: humor1268Not measuredOnly GLM 5V Turbo measured
LMArena Vision: captioning1264Not measuredOnly GLM 5V Turbo measured
LMArena Vision: recognizing things1241Not measuredOnly GLM 5V Turbo measured
LMArena Vision: creative writing1252Not measuredOnly GLM 5V Turbo measured
LMArena Document1416Not measuredOnly GLM 5V Turbo measured
Neither model has a result on the other 18 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GLM 5V Turbo and Step 3.5 Flash
BenchmarkGLM 5V TurboStep 3.5 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 5V Turbo$0.0032Fits in one request
Step 3.5 Flash$0.0003Fits in one request

Step 3.5 Flash costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GLM 5V Turbo$0.072Fits in one request
Step 3.5 Flash$0.0059Fits in one request

Step 3.5 Flash costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GLM 5V Turbo$0.280Exceeds the context window
Step 3.5 Flash$0.023Fits in one request

Step 3.5 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 5V Turbo and Step 3.5 Flash
SpecificationZ.ai GLM 5V TurboStepFun Step 3.5 Flash
MakerZ.aiStepFun
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedApril 1, 2026January 29, 2026
Context window203K262K
Input $/Mtok$1.20$0.10
Output $/Mtok$4.00$0.30
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it10
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GLM 5V Turbo better than Step 3.5 Flash for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick GLM 5V Turbo for work measured by GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) or Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run), where it leads.

Which is cheaper, GLM 5V Turbo or Step 3.5 Flash?

GLM 5V Turbo costs $1.20 per million input tokens and $4.00 per million output tokens; Step 3.5 Flash costs $0.10 and $0.30. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, GLM 5V Turbo or Step 3.5 Flash?

Step 3.5 Flash, with 262K tokens against 203K.

How many benchmarks is the GLM 5V Turbo vs Step 3.5 Flash comparison based on?

34 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. GLM 5V Turbo's coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark and Step 3.5 Flash's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next