Price Per TokenPrice Per Token
Qwen
Qwen
vs
Z-ai

Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 vs GLM-4.7-Flash

A detailed comparison of pricing, benchmarks, and capabilities

Get our weekly newsletter on pricing changes, new releases, and tools.

Join the Price Per Token Community

Key Takeaways

Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 wins:

  • Cheaper output tokens
  • Larger context window
  • Better at coding
  • Better at math

GLM-4.7-Flash wins:

  • Cheaper input tokens
  • Faster response time
  • Higher intelligence benchmark
  • Supports vision
  • Has reasoning mode
Price Advantage
Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
Benchmark Advantage
Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
Context Window
Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
Speed
GLM-4.7-Flash

Pricing Comparison

Benchmark Comparison

Context & Performance

Capabilities

Feature Comparison

FeatureQwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507GLM-4.7-Flash
Vision (Image Input)
Tool/Function Calls
Reasoning Mode
Audio Input
Audio Output
PDF Input
Prompt Caching
Web Search

License & Release

PropertyQwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507GLM-4.7-Flash
LicenseOpen SourceOpen Source
AuthorQwenZ-ai
ReleasedJul 2025Jan 2026

Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 Modalities

Input
text
Output
text

GLM-4.7-Flash Modalities

Input
text
Output
text

Frequently Asked Questions

GLM-4.7-Flash has cheaper input pricing at $0.06/M tokens. Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 has cheaper output pricing at $0.30/M tokens.
Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 scores higher on coding benchmarks with a score of 14.2, compared to GLM-4.7-Flash's score of 11.0.
Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 has a 262,144 token context window, while GLM-4.7-Flash has a 202,752 token context window.
Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 does not support vision. GLM-4.7-Flash supports vision.