Navigate
AI BENCHY
Advertise here

Qwen: Qwen3.7 Plus vs Z.ai: GLM 5.2

The average score is effectively tied at 7.9 vs 7.8. GLM 5.2 (medium) has the lower benchmark cost at $0.068 vs $0.267. GLM 5.2 (medium) is faster at 23.28s vs 51.51s, with pass rates of 75.8% vs 80.3%.

Recommended modelGLM 5.2 (medium)It has the best score here (7.8), while costing about 3.9x less than Qwen3.7 Plus (medium).

Last updated at: 2026-07-18

Metric Qwen3.7 Plus Qwen3.7 Plus medium Release: 2026-06-03 GLM 5.2 GLM 5.2 medium Release: 2026-06-17
Score 7.9 7.8
Rank #36 #38
Reliability 10.0 9.5
Consistency 8.9 8.0
Tests Correct
Attempt pass rate 75.8% 80.3%
Flaky tests 3 4
Total Runs 66 63
Cost per result 2.072 2.159
Total Cost $0.267 $0.068
Input Price $0.320 / 1M $0.293 / 1M
Output Price $1.280 / 1M $0.920 / 1M
Total Input Tokens 115,233 37,199
Output Tokens 6,162 12,261
Reasoning Tokens 173,267 49,500
Response Time (avg) 51.51s 23.28s
Response Time (max) 315.30s 101.36s
Response Time (total) 1133.15s 488.94s

Hamster playing table tennis

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

#36 Qwen3.7 Plus

medium
Cost
$0.018
Time
193.2s
Tokens
10,821 tok

#38 GLM 5.2

medium
Cost
$0.041
Time
195.8s
Tokens
9,287 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
Qwen3.7 Plus 6.1 6.6 55.6% 1 108.60s 6,472 414 43,576
GLM 5.2 8.2 7.2 88.9% 1 40.96s 7,317 1,475 17,123

Quick Compare

Switch Comparison Pair