GLM-5.3 (Low) vs Qwen3.8 Max (0902)
Which is better for the money: GLM-5.3 (Low) by Z AI or Qwen3.8 Max (0902) by Alibaba? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-25.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Qwen3.8 Max (0902) scores 11.1 points higher (45.4 vs 34.3) but costs 4.9× as much to run the benchmark ($4935 vs $1013; flagship vs premium cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Qwen3.8 Max (0902) when you need intelligence above 34.3, and GLM-5.3 (Low) when 34.3 is enough.
| Metric | GLM-5.3 (Low) | Qwen3.8 Max (0902) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 34.3 | 45.4 | +32.4% Qwen3.8 Max (0902) is 32.4% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $1,012.50 | $4,934.79 | +387.4% Qwen3.8 Max (0902) is 4.9× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 31.40s | 62.92s | +100.4% Qwen3.8 Max (0902) is 100.4% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $1.40 / $4.40 | $2.00 / $6.00 | |
| Input modalities | Text | Text, Image |
Qwen3.8 Max (0902) vs GLM-5.3 (Low): 32.4% more intelligence, 387.4% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 100.4% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- GLM-5.3 (Low) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Xhigh) scores 51.00 for $662.
- Qwen3.8 Max (0902) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) scores 56.00 for $4057.
GLM-5.3 (Low)Qwen3.8 Max (0902)Today'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-low/qwen3-8-max · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/glm-5-3-low/qwen3-8-max?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill