Qwen3.5 35B A3B Base vs GLM 5.3 Flash
At a Glance
| Compare |  GLM 5.3 FlashZ.ai | |
|---|---|---|
| Intelligence, Cost, and Efficiency | ||
| IntelligenceHigher is better · MM Intelligence v2.5 | UnrankedNot in the 46-model eligible cohort | #29 of 4654.6 score · 2/3 sources · provisional · missing ARC-AGI-2 · full-core range 36.4–69.8 |
| CostLower is better · Published-token output estimate | UnrankedNot in the 44-model eligible cohort | #2 of 44$0.0087 per LiveBench case |
| EfficiencyHigher is better · MM Efficiency v1.5 | UnrankedNot in the 38-model eligible cohort | #1 of 3877.3 score · 2/3 sources · provisional · missing ARC-AGI-2 · full-core range 68.2–84.9 |
| Pricing and Limits | ||
| Input priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | Not reported | $0.075Z.ai ↗ · Aug 29, 2026 |
| Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | Not reported | $0.25Z.ai ↗ · Aug 29, 2026 |
| Context windowMaximum documented tokens | 262K | 1,000K |
| Model facts checked | Aug 28, 2026View model evidence → | Sep 2, 2026View model evidence → |
Token prices are the lowest available sourced USD rates; input and output may use different providers. Cost ranking estimates output spend on LiveBench, not a full request bill. Ranking methodology →
Available Benchmarks
Side-by-Side Facts
| Field | Qwen3.5-35B-A3B-Base | GLM-5.3-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Developer | Qwen | Z.ai |
| Family | Qwen3 5 35b A3b Base | Glm 5 3 Flash |
| Model | Qwen3.5-35B-A3B-Base | GLM-5.3-Flash |
| Version | Qwen3.5-35B-A3B-Base | GLM-5.3-Flash |
| Lifecycle | active | active |
| Released | Unknown | 2026-09-02 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Unknown | Unknown |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image, Video, Document |
| Output modalities | Text | Text |
| Context window | 262K | 1,000K |
| Total parameters | 36B | 320B |
| Active parameters | 3B | 18B |
| License | apache-2.0 | MIT |
| Open weights | Yes | Yes |
| API available | Unknown | Yes |
| Self-hostable | Yes | Yes |
| Provider access | Unknown | Deepinfra (Standard), Fireworks Ai (Standard), Together Ai (Standard), Z.ai (Standard) |
| Capabilities | chat, generation, tools | agents, chat, computer-use, reasoning, structured_outputs, tools, vision |
Qwen3.5 35B A3B Base Capabilities
GLM 5.3 Flash Capabilities
Related Comparisons
All image comparisons →| A | Pair | B | Context |
|---|---|---|---|
| vs |  GPT-6 AstraOpenAI | cross-developer peersimage, text | |
| vs | Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | cross-developer peersimage, text | |
| vs |  Gemini 3.1 ProGoogle DeepMind | cross-developer peerstext | |
| vs |  DeepSeek-V4.1-FlashDeepSeek | cross-developer peersimage, text | |
| vs | Grok 4.6xAI | cross-developer peersimage, text | |
| vs |  Qwen3.8-MaxQwen | family variantsimage, text | |
| vs |  Kimi-K3Moonshot AI | cross-developer peersimage, text | |
 MiniMax-M3MiniMax | vs | cross-developer peersimage, text | |
| vs | GLM-5.3Z.ai | cross-developer peerstext | |
| vs |  Hy4 previewTencent | cross-developer peerstext | |
| vs | Seed 2.1 ProByteDance Seed | cross-developer peersimage, text | |
| vs |  Mistral Large 3Mistral AI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Primary Evidence
Sources and Freshness
Questions
Qwen3.5 35B A3B Base vs GLM 5.3 Flash FAQs
Is Qwen3.5 35B A3B Base or GLM 5.3 Flash better for coding?+
This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Qwen3.5 35B A3B Base and GLM 5.3 Flash, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.
Which is cheaper, Qwen3.5 35B A3B Base or GLM 5.3 Flash?+
Only GLM 5.3 Flash has a directly sourced input price: $0.075 per million tokens. Only GLM 5.3 Flash has a directly sourced output price: $0.25 per million tokens.
Which has a larger context window, Qwen3.5 35B A3B Base or GLM 5.3 Flash?+
GLM 5.3 Flash has the larger sourced context window. Qwen3.5 35B A3B Base supports 262K and GLM 5.3 Flash supports 1,000K.
Which performs better in benchmarks, Qwen3.5 35B A3B Base or GLM 5.3 Flash?+
There is no overall benchmark winner: At least two independently verified, protocol-matched benchmarks are required for an overall winner.
Can Qwen3.5 35B A3B Base or GLM 5.3 Flash be self-hosted?+
Both models have the same recorded self-hosting status: supported. Qwen3.5 35B A3B Base is open weight; GLM 5.3 Flash is open weight.
Can Qwen3.5 35B A3B Base and GLM 5.3 Flash understand images?+
Qwen3.5 35B A3B Base is documented with image input; GLM 5.3 Flash is documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.
Which can generate longer answers, Qwen3.5 35B A3B Base or GLM 5.3 Flash?+
Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. Qwen3.5 35B A3B Base is — and GLM 5.3 Flash is 131K.
Do Qwen3.5 35B A3B Base and GLM 5.3 Flash support reasoning and tool use?+
Qwen3.5 35B A3B Base: tool calling and image input. GLM 5.3 Flash: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Feature support does not establish relative quality.
Which is available from more inference providers, Qwen3.5 35B A3B Base or GLM 5.3 Flash?+
Qwen3.5 35B A3B Base has 0 sourced provider routes; GLM 5.3 Flash has 4, so GLM 5.3 Flash has broader tracked availability.
Which offers better value, Qwen3.5 35B A3B Base or GLM 5.3 Flash?+
There is no universal value winner. Compare the input and output prices above with the matched benchmark result for your workload: cheaper tokens can be offset by different quality, token usage, latency, or provider availability.