Navigate
AI BENCHY
Advertise here

Qwen3.5-Flash vs GLM 5.3 Flash (low)

Qwen3.5-Flash leads on average score with 6.0 vs 5.9. GLM 5.3 Flash (low) has the lower benchmark cost at $0.015 vs $0.073. GLM 5.3 Flash (low) is faster at 9.65s vs 25.28s, with pass rates of 34.9% vs 56.1%.

Last updated at: 2026-08-26

Rank
#189
Total Output Tokens
209,201
Response Time (avg)
25.28s
Total Cost
$0.073
Rank
#195
Total Output Tokens
23,736
Response Time (avg)
9.65s
Total Cost
$0.015
Recommended model GLM 5.3 Flash (low)

Its score stays close to the best score here (5.9 vs 6.0), while costing about 4.9x less than Qwen3.5-Flash.

Detailed comparison

Metric Qwen3.5-Flash Qwen3.5-Flash none Release: 2026-02-24 GLM 5.3 Flash GLM 5.3 Flash low Release: 2026-08-26
Score 6.0 5.9
Rank #189 #195
Reliability 10.0 10.0
Consistency 9.3 8.4
Attempts 66/66 66/66
Tests Correct
Attempt pass rate 34.9% 56.1%
Flaky tests 2 4
Total Runs 66 66
Cost per result 1.066 0.148
Total Cost $0.073 $0.015
Input Price $0.065 / 1M $0.075 / 1M
Output Price $0.260 / 1M $0.250 / 1M
Total Input Tokens 282,356 117,551
Output Tokens 209,201 9,199
Reasoning Tokens 0 14,537
Response Time (avg) 25.28s 9.65s
Response Time (max) 480.96s 90.45s
Response Time (total) 556.14s 212.22s
Parameters ~35B total (~3B active) 320B total (18B active)
Availability Closed Open source

Model generation showcase

Hamster playing table tennis

Prompt: Create a detailed SVG illustration of a hamster playing table tennis.

#189 Qwen3.5-Flash

none
Cost
$0.003
Time
47.4s
Tokens
7,799 tok

#195 GLM 5.3 Flash

low
Cost
$0.001
Time
20.7s
Tokens
1,482 tok

Top Models by Score

Score vs Total Cost

Response Time (avg)

Score vs Response Time (avg)

Total Output Tokens

Score vs Total Output Tokens

Category Breakdown

Coding Score Consistency Attempt pass rate Flaky tests Tests Correct Response Time (avg) Input Tokens Output Tokens Reasoning Tokens
Qwen3.5-Flash 5.5 10.0 33.3% 0 850ms 7,913 519 0
GLM 5.3 Flash 5.4 7.2 44.4% 1 10.38s 7,317 398 3,973

Quick Compare

Switch Comparison Pair