GLM-5.3-Flash vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
Which is better for the money: GLM-5.3-Flash by Z AI or Qwen3.8-Flash-Next by Alibaba? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-25.
Clear winner
Verdict
Pick GLM-5.3-Flash
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next vs GLM-5.3-Flash: 4.8% less intelligence, 18.7% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 31.5% slower end-to-end.
| Metric | GLM-5.3-Flash | Qwen3.8-Flash-Next | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 41.8 | 39.8 | −4.8% Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is 4.8% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $305.52 | $362.72 | +18.7% Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is 18.7% more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 38.43s | 50.52s | +31.5% Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is 31.5% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.15 / $0.50 | $0.15 / $0.47 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image, Video |
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- GLM-5.3-Flash is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
- Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Medium) scores 47.80 for $361.
GLM-5.3-FlashQwen3.8-Flash-NextToday's Pareto frontierOpen-weights frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/glm-5-3-flash/qwen3-8-flash-next · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/glm-5-3-flash/qwen3-8-flash-next?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill