GLM-5.3 (Max) vs Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
Which is better for the money: GLM-5.3 (Max) by Z AI or Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B by Alibaba? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-26.
Clear winner
Verdict
Pick GLM-5.3 (Max)
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B vs GLM-5.3 (Max): 10.9% less intelligence, 5.1% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 135.1% slower end-to-end.
| Metric | GLM-5.3 (Max) | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 44.8 | 39.9 | −10.9% Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is 10.9% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $2,503.48 | $2,632.05 | +5.1% Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is 5.1% more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 27.83s | 65.43s | +135.1% Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is 135.1% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $1.40 / $4.40 | $2.00 / $6.00 | |
| Input modalities | Text | Text |
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- GLM-5.3 (Max) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (High, Default Fallback) scores 53.60 for $2172.
- Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (High, Default Fallback) scores 53.60 for $2172.
GLM-5.3 (Max)Qwen3.8 2.4T A95BToday'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/qwen3-8-2-4t-a95b · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/glm-5-3/qwen3-8-2-4t-a95b?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill