Price Per TokenPrice Per Token
Qwen
Qwen
vs
Z-ai

Qwen3 30B A3B 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 wins:

  • Cheaper output tokens
  • Better at coding
  • Better at math

GLM-4.7-Flash wins:

  • Cheaper input tokens
  • Larger context window
  • Faster response time
  • Higher intelligence benchmark
  • Supports vision
Price Advantage
Qwen3 30B A3B
Benchmark Advantage
Qwen3 30B A3B
Context Window
GLM-4.7-Flash
Speed
GLM-4.7-Flash

Pricing Comparison

Benchmark Comparison

Context & Performance

Capabilities

Feature Comparison

FeatureQwen3 30B A3BGLM-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 A3BGLM-4.7-Flash
LicenseOpen SourceOpen Source
AuthorQwenZ-ai
ReleasedApr 2025Jan 2026

Qwen3 30B A3B 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 has cheaper output pricing at $0.28/M tokens.
Qwen3 30B A3B scores higher on coding benchmarks with a score of 13.3, compared to GLM-4.7-Flash's score of 11.0.
Qwen3 30B A3B has a 40,960 token context window, while GLM-4.7-Flash has a 202,752 token context window.
Qwen3 30B A3B does not support vision. GLM-4.7-Flash supports vision.