Price Per TokenPrice Per Token
Qwen
Qwen
vs
Z
Z-ai

Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct 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 Next 80B A3B Instruct wins:

  • Larger context window
  • Faster response time
  • Better at coding
  • Better at math

GLM-4.7-Flash wins:

  • Cheaper input tokens
  • Cheaper output tokens
  • Higher intelligence benchmark
  • Supports vision
  • Has reasoning mode
Price Advantage
GLM-4.7-Flash
Benchmark Advantage
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct
Context Window
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct
Speed
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct

Pricing Comparison

Benchmark Comparison

Context & Performance

Capabilities

Feature Comparison

FeatureQwen3 Next 80B A3B InstructGLM-4.7-Flash
Vision (Image Input)
Tool/Function Calls
Reasoning Mode
Audio Input
Audio Output
PDF Input
Prompt Caching
Web Search

License & Release

PropertyQwen3 Next 80B A3B InstructGLM-4.7-Flash
LicenseOpen SourceOpen Source
AuthorQwenZ-ai
ReleasedSep 2025Jan 2026

Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct Modalities

Input
text
Output
text

GLM-4.7-Flash Modalities

Input
text
Output
text

Related Comparisons

See all model comparisons

Frequently Asked Questions

GLM-4.7-Flash has cheaper input pricing at $0.06/M tokens. GLM-4.7-Flash has cheaper output pricing at $0.40/M tokens.
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks with a score of 15.3, compared to GLM-4.7-Flash's score of 11.0.
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct has a 262,144 token context window, while GLM-4.7-Flash has a 202,752 token context window.
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct does not support vision. GLM-4.7-Flash supports vision.

Built by @aellman

Archive
Follow us:
Advertise | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy

2026 68 Ventures, LLC. All rights reserved.