Model Comparison

GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3 30B A3B

GLM-4.7-Flash significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Qwen3 30B A3B is 1.0x cheaper per token.

Want to compare interactively?Try the playground

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

2 benchmarks

GLM-4.7-Flash outperforms in 2 benchmarks (AIME 2025, GPQA), while Qwen3 30B A3B is better at 0 benchmarks.

GLM-4.7-Flash significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Sun May 03 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Qwen3 30B A3B costs less

For input processing, GLM-4.7-Flash ($0.07/1M tokens) is 1.4x cheaper than Qwen3 30B A3B ($0.10/1M tokens).

For output processing, GLM-4.7-Flash ($0.40/1M tokens) is 1.3x more expensive than Qwen3 30B A3B ($0.30/1M tokens).

In conclusion, GLM-4.7-Flash is more expensive than Qwen3 30B A3B.*

* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens

Lowest available price from all providers

Sun May 03 2026 • llm-stats.com

GLM-4.7-Flash

Input tokens$0.07

Output tokens$0.40

Best providerUnknown Organization

Qwen3 30B A3B

Input tokens$0.10

Output tokens$0.30

Best providerDeepinfra

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

500.0M diff

Qwen3 30B A3B has 0.5B more parameters than GLM-4.7-Flash, making it 1.7% larger.

GLM-4.7-Flash

30.0Bparameters

Qwen3 30B A3B

30.5Bparameters

30.0B

GLM-4.7-Flash

30.5B

Qwen3 30B A3B

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Both models have the same input context window of 128,000 tokens. Qwen3 30B A3B can generate longer responses up to 128,000 tokens, while GLM-4.7-Flash is limited to 16,384 tokens.

GLM-4.7-Flash

Input128,000 tokens

Output16,384 tokens

Qwen3 30B A3B

Input128,000 tokens

Output128,000 tokens

Sun May 03 2026 • llm-stats.com

License

Usage and distribution terms

GLM-4.7-Flash is licensed under MIT, while Qwen3 30B A3B uses Apache 2.0.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

GLM-4.7-Flash

MIT

Open weights

Qwen3 30B A3B

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

GLM-4.7-Flash was released on 2026-01-19, while Qwen3 30B A3B was released on 2025-04-29.

GLM-4.7-Flash is 9 months newer than Qwen3 30B A3B.

GLM-4.7-Flash

Jan 19, 2026

3 months ago

8mo newer

Qwen3 30B A3B

Apr 29, 2025

1.0 years ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.

Unable to compare the recency of their training data.

No cutoff dates available

Provider Availability

GLM-4.7-Flash is available from ZAI. Qwen3 30B A3B is available from DeepInfra, Novita, Fireworks.

GLM-4.7-Flash

Unknown Organization

Input Price:Input: $0.07/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.40/1M

Qwen3 30B A3B

Deepinfra

Input Price:Input: $0.10/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.30/1M

Novita

Input Price:Input: $0.10/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.44/1M

Fireworks

Input Price:Input: $0.89/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.89/1M

* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Key Takeaways

GLM-4.7-Flash

View details

Zhipu AI

Less expensive input tokens

Higher AIME 2025 score (91.6% vs 70.9%)

Higher GPQA score (75.2% vs 65.8%)

Qwen3 30B A3B

View details

Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team

Less expensive output tokens

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature	GLM-4.7-Flash	Qwen3 30B A3B

FAQ

Common questions about GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3 30B A3B.

Which is better, GLM-4.7-Flash or Qwen3 30B A3B?

GLM-4.7-Flash significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. GLM-4.7-Flash is made by Zhipu AI and Qwen3 30B A3B is made by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their benchmark scores, pricing, and capabilities above.

How does GLM-4.7-Flash compare to Qwen3 30B A3B in benchmarks?

GLM-4.7-Flash scores AIME 2025: 91.6%, Tau-bench: 79.5%, GPQA: 75.2%, SWE-Bench Verified: 59.2%, BrowseComp: 42.8%. Qwen3 30B A3B scores Arena Hard: 91.0%, AIME 2024: 80.4%, LiveBench: 74.3%, Multi-IF: 72.2%, AIME 2025: 70.9%.

Is GLM-4.7-Flash cheaper than Qwen3 30B A3B?

GLM-4.7-Flash is 1.4x cheaper for input tokens. GLM-4.7-Flash costs $0.07/M input and $0.40/M output via z. Qwen3 30B A3B costs $0.10/M input and $0.30/M output via deepinfra.

What are the context window sizes for GLM-4.7-Flash and Qwen3 30B A3B?

GLM-4.7-Flash supports 128K tokens and Qwen3 30B A3B supports 128K tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between GLM-4.7-Flash and Qwen3 30B A3B?

Key differences include input pricing ($0.07 vs $0.10/M), licensing (MIT vs Apache 2.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes GLM-4.7-Flash and Qwen3 30B A3B?

GLM-4.7-Flash is developed by Zhipu AI and Qwen3 30B A3B is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team.