Model Comparison

GLM-5 vs DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32BWhich is better in 2026?

Comparing GLM-5 and DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B across benchmarks, pricing, and capabilities.

Verdict: GLM-5 vs DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B — which is better?

GLM-5 (by Zhipu AI) and DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B (by DeepSeek) are two of the AI models people compare most. Here is how they stack up on benchmarks, price and capabilities, and which one to pick in 2026.

On price, DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B is roughly 11.5x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

GLM-5 also accepts a larger context window (200,000 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.

Choose GLM-5 if…

  • you process long inputs — it offers a 200,000 token context window
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Feb 2026

Choose DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B if…

  • cost matters — it's about 11.5x cheaper per token
Want to compare interactively?Try the playground

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

No common benchmarks found

GLM-5 and DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B don't have any common benchmark datasets to compare. They may have been evaluated on different testing suites.

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B costs less

For input processing, GLM-5 ($1.00/1M tokens) is 8.3x more expensive than DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B ($0.12/1M tokens).

For output processing, GLM-5 ($3.20/1M tokens) is 17.8x more expensive than DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B ($0.18/1M tokens).

In conclusion, GLM-5 is more expensive than DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B.*

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

Lowest available price from all providers
Sat Jun 06 2026 • llm-stats.com
Zhipu AI
GLM-5
Input tokens$1.00
Output tokens$3.20
Best providerFriendliAI
DeepSeek
DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B
Input tokens$0.12
Output tokens$0.18
Best providerDeepinfra
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

711.2B diff

GLM-5 has 711.2B more parameters than DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B, making it 2168.3% larger.

Zhipu AI
GLM-5
744.0Bparameters
DeepSeek
DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B
32.8Bparameters
744.0B
GLM-5
32.8B
DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

GLM-5 accepts 200,000 input tokens compared to DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B's 128,000 tokens. Both models can generate responses up to 128,000 tokens.

Zhipu AI
GLM-5
Input200,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
DeepSeek
DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B
Input128,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Sat Jun 06 2026 • llm-stats.com

License

Usage and distribution terms

Both models are licensed under MIT.

Both models share the same licensing terms, providing consistent usage rights.

GLM-5

MIT

Open weights

DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B

MIT

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

GLM-5 was released on 2026-02-11, while DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B was released on 2025-01-20.

GLM-5 is 13 months newer than DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B.

GLM-5

Feb 11, 2026

3 months ago

1.1yr newer
DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B

Jan 20, 2025

1.4 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-5 is available from FriendliAI, ZAI. DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B is available from DeepInfra.

GLM-5

friendli logo
FriendliAI
Input Price:Input: $1.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $3.20/1M
z logo
Unknown Organization
Input Price:Input: $1.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $3.20/1M

DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B

deepinfra logo
Deepinfra
Input Price:Input: $0.12/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.18/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Key Takeaways

Zhipu AI
Larger context window (200,000 tokens)
DeepSeek
Less expensive input tokens
Less expensive output tokens

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
Zhipu AI
GLM-5
DeepSeek
DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B

FAQ

Common questions about GLM-5 vs DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B.

Which is better, GLM-5 or DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B?

GLM-5 (Zhipu AI) and DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B (DeepSeek) each have strengths in different areas. Compare their benchmark scores, pricing, context windows, and capabilities above to determine which fits your needs.

How does GLM-5 compare to DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B in benchmarks?

GLM-5 scores t2-bench: 89.7%, SWE-Bench Verified: 77.8%, BrowseComp: 75.9%, MCP Atlas: 67.8%, Terminal-Bench 2.0: 56.2%. DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B scores MATH-500: 94.3%, AIME 2024: 83.3%, GPQA: 62.1%, LiveCodeBench: 57.2%.

Is GLM-5 cheaper than DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B?

DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B is 8.3x cheaper for input tokens. GLM-5 costs $1.00/M input and $3.20/M output via friendli. DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B costs $0.12/M input and $0.18/M output via deepinfra.

What are the context window sizes for GLM-5 and DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B?

GLM-5 supports 200K tokens and DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B 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-5 and DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B?

Key differences include context window (200K vs 128K), input pricing ($1.00 vs $0.12/M). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes GLM-5 and DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B?

GLM-5 is developed by Zhipu AI and DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B is developed by DeepSeek.

Related comparisons