The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

GLM-5.3-Flash vs Qwen3.7-Plus

GLM-5.3-Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 51.6 to 43.3. GLM-5.3-Flash is 2.4x cheaper per token.

Zhipu AI · Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

GLM-5.3-Flash leads the overall LLM Stats Score 51.6 to 43.3, ranking #11 overall.

In the 4 individual benchmarks reported for both models, GLM-5.3-Flash wins 3; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.

On price, GLM-5.3-Flash is roughly 2.4x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

GLM-5.3-Flash also accepts a larger context window (1,048,576 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.

Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose GLM-5.3-Flash

  • overall performance matters — it scores 51.6 and ranks #11 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning and coding — it leads those capability indexes
  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 3 of 4 exact shared results
  • cost matters — it's about 2.4x cheaper per token
  • you process long inputs — it offers a 1,048,576 token context window
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Aug 2026
  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

Choose Qwen3.7-Plus

  • you want predictable pricing at $0.32/M input and $1.28/M output

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

GLM-5.3-Flash
Zhipu AI
Qwen3.7-Plus
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
51.6
#11
43.3
#36
Reasoning
50.3
#13
43.6
#33
Coding
37.8
#22
32.5
#41
Agents
39.1
#9
26.1
#39
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
3 of 4
1 of 4
Input price
$0.15 / M
$0.32 / M
Output price
$0.50 / M
$1.28 / M
Context window
1,048,576
1,000,000

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

3 shared
Index
GLM-5.3-Flash
Qwen3.7-Plus
Vision
32.0#21
32.8#17
Tool use
34.2#4
24.3#33
Multimodal
30.9#24
35.2#9
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

15 reported for GLM-5.3-Flash · 70 for Qwen3.7-Plus

4 shared

GLM-5.3-Flash outperforms in 3 benchmarks (CharXiv-R, Humanity's Last Exam, NL2Repo), while Qwen3.7-Plus is better at 1 benchmark (BabyVision).

GLM-5.3-Flash shows notably better performance in the majority of benchmarks.

Fri Aug 28 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

GLM-5.3-Flash costs less

For input processing, GLM-5.3-Flash ($0.15/1M tokens) is 2.1x cheaper than Qwen3.7-Plus ($0.32/1M tokens).

For output processing, GLM-5.3-Flash ($0.50/1M tokens) is 2.6x cheaper than Qwen3.7-Plus ($1.28/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Qwen3.7-Plus is more expensive than GLM-5.3-Flash.*

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

Lowest available price from all providers
Fri Aug 28 2026 • llm-stats.com
Zhipu AI
GLM-5.3-Flash
Input tokens$0.15
Output tokens$0.50
Best providerDeepinfra
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3.7-Plus
Input tokens$0.32
Output tokens$1.28
Best providerTogether
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

GLM-5.3-Flash accepts 1,048,576 input tokens compared to Qwen3.7-Plus's 1,000,000 tokens. GLM-5.3-Flash can generate longer responses up to 131,072 tokens, while Qwen3.7-Plus is limited to 65,536 tokens.

Zhipu AI
GLM-5.3-Flash
Input1,048,576 tokens
Output131,072 tokens
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3.7-Plus
Input1,000,000 tokens
Output65,536 tokens
Fri Aug 28 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Both GLM-5.3-Flash and Qwen3.7-Plus support multimodal inputs.

They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.

GLM-5.3-Flash

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Qwen3.7-Plus

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

GLM-5.3-Flash is licensed under MIT, while Qwen3.7-Plus uses a proprietary license.

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

GLM-5.3-Flash

MIT

Open weights

Qwen3.7-Plus

Proprietary

Closed source

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

GLM-5.3-Flash was released on 2026-08-26, while Qwen3.7-Plus was released on 2026-05-31.

GLM-5.3-Flash is 3 months newer than Qwen3.7-Plus.

GLM-5.3-Flash

Aug 26, 2026

2 days ago

2mo newer
Qwen3.7-Plus

May 31, 2026

2 months 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-5.3-Flash is available from DeepInfra, Novita, ZAI. Qwen3.7-Plus is available from Together, Fireworks.

GLM-5.3-Flash

deepinfra logo
Deepinfra
Input Price:Input: $0.15/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.50/1M
novita logo
Novita
Input Price:Input: $0.15/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.50/1M
z logo
Unknown Organization
Input Price:Input: $0.15/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.50/1M

Qwen3.7-Plus

together logo
Together
Input Price:Input: $0.32/1MOutput Price:Output: $1.28/1M
fireworks logo
Fireworks
Input Price:Input: $0.40/1MOutput Price:Output: $1.60/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against GLM-5.3-Flash and Qwen3.7-Plus side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

GLM-5.3-Flash
✓ Preferred
Qwen3.7-Plus
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about GLM-5.3-Flash vs Qwen3.7-Plus.

Which is better, GLM-5.3-Flash or Qwen3.7-Plus?

GLM-5.3-Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 51.6 to 43.3. GLM-5.3-Flash is made by Zhipu AI and Qwen3.7-Plus is made by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does GLM-5.3-Flash compare to Qwen3.7-Plus in benchmarks?

GLM-5.3-Flash scores CharXiv-R: 89.4%, Terminal-Bench 2.1: 84.3%, MMVU: 80.5%, Toolathlon: 78.4%, Chartography: 78.0%. Qwen3.7-Plus scores IFEval: 94.6%, MMLU-Redux: 94.5%, HMMT Feb 26: 92.9%, MRCR v2: 91.7%, OmniDocBench 1.5: 91.4%.

Is GLM-5.3-Flash cheaper than Qwen3.7-Plus?

GLM-5.3-Flash is 2.1x cheaper for input tokens. GLM-5.3-Flash costs $0.15/M input and $0.50/M output via deepinfra. Qwen3.7-Plus costs $0.32/M input and $1.28/M output via together.

What are the context window sizes for GLM-5.3-Flash and Qwen3.7-Plus?

GLM-5.3-Flash supports 1.0M tokens and Qwen3.7-Plus supports 1.0M tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between GLM-5.3-Flash and Qwen3.7-Plus?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (51.6 vs 43.3), context window (1.0M vs 1.0M), input pricing ($0.15 vs $0.32/M), licensing (MIT vs Proprietary). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes GLM-5.3-Flash and Qwen3.7-Plus?

GLM-5.3-Flash is developed by Zhipu AI and Qwen3.7-Plus is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team.

Related comparisons