- Home
- LLM comparison
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs. Qwen 3.8 27B
GLM-5.3-Flashvs.Qwen 3.8 27B
Which one is better?
GLM-5.3-Flash is clearly ahead in the overall index. Qwen 3.8 27B is cheaper for input, GLM-5.3-Flash for output.
GLM-5.3-Flash
Rank 32 to 41
Qwen 3.8 27B
Rank 44 to 57
GLM-5.3-Flash
fairly slow
Qwen 3.8 27B
slow
GLM-5.3-Flash
cheap
Qwen 3.8 27B
fairly cheap
GLM-5.3-Flash
- Subscription
At Z.ai from ≈ €19.08 a month (GLM Coding Plan Lite, with limited credits). Through other providers from ≈ €1.06 a month (Command Code Go, with limited credits). 26 plans in Germany.
- Via API
$0.15 input, $0.50 output per 1M tokens, unchanged since Aug 29, 2026.
Qwen 3.8 27B
- Subscription
No Alibaba subscription includes this model. Through other providers from ≈ €1.06 a month (Command Code Go, with limited credits). 10 plans in Germany.
- Via API
$0.04 input, $2.50 output per 1M tokens according to the provider; the price index has listed it at $0.42 and $3 since Oct 27, 2026.
Overall index with data through Oct 29, 2026 · Prices from Oct 29, 2026 · Speed: measured by Artificial Analysis · Subscriptions as of Oct 24, 2026 · Subscription prices incl. VAT
Where is the difference?
Values from 0 to 100 per task area. We only name a winner when the gap is large enough and there are enough tests.
GLM-5.3-Flash ahead: 7Qwen 3.8 27B ahead: 0level: 2too little data: 1of 10 areas
Show 2 more areas that do not count toward the overall index
See for yourself: same task, one attempt
The same prompt for both models. We show the latest attempt without fixes; it does not count toward the overall index.
Pelican on a bicycle
A community classic for free-form SVG drawing.
GLM-5.3-Flash

Reasoning (requested): high
Current attempt
- Run date
- Oct 1, 2026
- API provider
- openrouter
- Requested API model
- z-ai/glm-5.3-flash
- API model reported in response
- z-ai/glm-5.3-flash
- Reasoning setting
- high
- Pinned endpoint
- Z.AI | z-ai/glm-5.3-flash-20260826
- Temperature
- Provider default
- Token limit including reasoning
- 8,192 tokens
- Test protocol
- community-visual-tests-v1
- Technical checks
- Passed, not a quality rating
- Response time
- 49.7 s
Visually reviewed. This individual test does not establish overall model quality.
Earlier attempts (1)
- Sep 7, 2026API request failedReasoning setting: high
Qwen 3.8 27B
Not tested yet
Prompt and test conditions
Generate an SVG of a pelican riding a bicycle
Token limit including reasoning: 8,192 tokens
Task origin (Simon Willison)SVG short test
SVG short test
One SVG task with the same fixed settings for every model, without hidden thinking.
Shared test round: 43b8c5c46830
GLM-5.3-Flash
Unavailable in this round
Qwen 3.8 27B

Test details
API reports 0 reasoning tokensAPI model: qwen/qwen3.8-27b865 output tokensAll data side by side
The better value is bold. For the overall index only when the gap is clear.
| Metric | GLM-5.3-Flash | Qwen 3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| Intelligence | ||
| Overall index0 to 100, higher is better | 34 | 11 |
| Rank | Rank 32 to 41 of 95 | Rank 44 to 57 of 95 |
| Price per 1M tokens | ||
| Inputwhat you send | $0.15 | $0.04 |
| Outputwhat the model writes | $0.50 | $2.50 |
| Speed | ||
| Tokens per second | 78 | 40 |
| Technical | ||
| Context windowhow much text the model reads at once | 1 M tokens≈ 1,500 A4 pages | 262,144 tokens≈ 390 A4 pages |
| Knowledge cutoff | n/a | n/a |
| Released | Aug 26, 2026 | Aug 14, 2026 |
| Availability | Open Source | Active |
| Open weights | yes | yes |
Prices without caching or batch discounts · Page count as a rule of thumb from Artificial Analysis
Shared benchmarks
Single results from the same benchmark version, task and metric. A value is bold only with the same test setup and a clear gap.
A: GLM-5.3-FlashB: Qwen 3.8 27B
Show 54 more benchmarks
Compare another matchup
More matchups
Related LLM comparisons
Compare GLM-5.3-Flash and Qwen 3.8 27B with other leading models.