GLM 5.3 Flash vs Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B

Price, context window & benchmark comparison

Z

GLM 5.3 Flash

Z.ai (Zhipu)
$0.15 / $0.50
Input / Output · per 1M tokens
VS
Q

Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B

Qwen (Alibaba)
$2.00 / $6.00
Input / Output · per 1M tokens
Compare different models
Z
Q
Verdict: GLM 5.3 Flash is 12.6× cheaper than Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B on a typical 3:1 input/output mix. GLM 5.3 Flash scores higher on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index (41.8 vs 39.9). GLM 5.3 Flash has the larger context window (1.3M vs 1M).
GLM 5.3 FlashQwen3.8 2.4T A95B
Input price / 1M$0.15$2.00
Output price / 1M$0.50$6.00
Blended price (3:1)$0.24$3.00
Cached input / 1M$0.05$0.25
Context window1.3M1M
Max output944K131K
Intelligence index41.839.9
Coding index71.571.9
Providers31
Best provider uptime (30m)100.0%
Vision inputYesNo
ReasoningYesYes
Tool callingYesYes
Released2026-08-262026-08-12
Retirement

Cost calculator

FAQ

Which is cheaper, GLM 5.3 Flash or Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B?

GLM 5.3 Flash is 12.6× cheaper than Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B on a typical 3:1 input/output mix.

GLM 5.3 Flash vs Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B: which has a bigger context window?

GLM 5.3 Flash: 1,310,720 tokens. Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B: 1,048,576 tokens.

How much would 1 million requests cost?

At 2,000 input + 500 output tokens per request: GLM 5.3 Flash ≈ $550.00, Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B ≈ $7,000.

More comparisons