Skip to content

Qwen3.5-122B-A10B vs GLM 5.3 Flash (batch)

Qwen3.5-122B-A10B

Alibaba

78#106
vs
GLM 5.3 Flash (batch)

Zhipu AI

78#105
Signal-by-Signal Comparison
SignalQwen3.5-122B-A10BDeltaGLM 5.3 Flash (batch)
Capabilities
83
--
83
Benchmarks
78
+1
77
Pricing
98
-2
100
Context window size
86
-9
96
Recency
97
-3
100
Output Capacity
79
-17
96
Overall Result
1 wins
of 6
4 wins
GLM 5.3 Flash (batch) wins 4 of 6 signals

Score History

Score History (30 data points)
Qwen3.5-122B-A10BGLM 5.3 Flash (batch)
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B

77.7

current score

Leader

GLM 5.3 Flash (batch)

right now

GLM 5.3 Flash (batch)

77.8

current score

LMMarketCap.com
Interactive Price Comparison
100Kcalls/month
1,000tokens (~1,333 chars)
500tokens (~667 chars)

Qwen3.5-122B-A10B

Alibaba

Per request$0.001490
Daily$4.97
Monthly$149.00
Annual$1788.00

GLM 5.3 Flash (batch)

Zhipu AI

Best Value
Per request$0.000200
Daily$0.67
Monthly$20.00
Annual$240.00

GLM 5.3 Flash (batch) saves you $129.00/month

That's $1548.00/year compared to Qwen3.5-122B-A10B at your current usage level of 100K calls/month.

87% cheaper
Choose GLM 5.3 Flash (batch) for cost optimization

Qwen3.5-122B-A10B pricing:
Input:$0.29/M tokens
Output:$2.40/M tokens
GLM 5.3 Flash (batch) pricing:
Input:$0.07/M tokens
Output:$0.25/M tokens
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B

Alibaba

78

Composite Score

Winner
GLM 5.3 Flash (batch)

Zhipu AI

78

Composite Score

Signal-by-Signal Comparison
MetricQwen3.5-122B-A10BGLM 5.3 Flash (batch)Winner
Overall Score
78
78
GLM 5.3 Flash (batch)
Rank#106#105
GLM 5.3 Flash (batch)
Quality Rank#106#105
GLM 5.3 Flash (batch)
Adoption Rank#106#105
GLM 5.3 Flash (batch)
Parameters122B----
Context Window262K1049K
GLM 5.3 Flash (batch)
Pricing$0.29/$2.40/M$0.07/$0.25/M--
Signal Scores
Capabilities
83
83
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
Benchmarks
78
77
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
Pricing
98
100
GLM 5.3 Flash (batch)
Context window size
86
96
GLM 5.3 Flash (batch)
Recency
97
100
GLM 5.3 Flash (batch)
Output Capacity
79
96
GLM 5.3 Flash (batch)
Benchmark Head-to-Head(2 benchmarks)
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B: 0GLM 5.3: 1
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
GLM 5.3
Normalized 0-100%
MMLU-Pro
86.7%-
Arena Elo
14171474
Benchmark Interpretation

Our score (0-100) is driven by benchmark performance (90%) from Arena Elo ratings, MMLU, GPQA, HumanEval, SWE-bench, and 15+ standardized evaluations. Capabilities and context window serve as tiebreakers (10%). Learn more about our methodology.

Qwen3.5-122B-A10BStrong Performer

Scores 78/100 (rank #106), placing it in the top 64% of all 290 models tracked.

Raw Quality0/100
Cost Efficiency0/100
Speed0/100
GLM 5.3 Flash (batch)Strong Performer

Scores 78/100 (rank #105), placing it in the top 64% of all 290 models tracked.

Raw Quality0/100
Cost Efficiency0/100
Speed0/100

With only a 0-point gap, these models are in the same performance tier. The practical difference in output quality is minimal - your choice should depend on pricing, latency requirements, and specific feature needs.

When to Use Each Model

Choose Qwen3.5-122B-A10B when you need:

  • Step-by-step reasoning and chain-of-thought problem solving
  • Self-hosted deployments where you need full control over the model

Choose GLM 5.3 Flash (batch) when you need:

  • High-volume production workloads where API costs must be minimized
  • Processing long documents or large codebases (1049K token context)
  • Step-by-step reasoning and chain-of-thought problem solving
  • Self-hosted deployments where you need full control over the model
Cost-Performance Analysis
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
Input cost$0.29/M tokens
Output cost$2.40/M tokens
Cost per quality point$0.035
Est. monthly (1M tokens/day)$40.35
GLM 5.3 Flash (batch)Best Value
Input cost$0.07/M tokens
Output cost$0.25/M tokens
Cost per quality point$0.004
Est. monthly (1M tokens/day)$4.88

GLM 5.3 Flash (batch) offers 88% better value per quality point. At 1M tokens/day, you'd spend $4.88/month with GLM 5.3 Flash (batch) vs $40.35/month with Qwen3.5-122B-A10B - a $35.48 monthly difference.

Latency & Speed
Qwen3.5-122B-A10BFaster
Speed score0/100
GLM 5.3 Flash (batch)
Speed score0/100

Both models have comparable response speeds. For most applications, the latency difference is negligible.

When latency matters most: Interactive chatbots, IDE code completion, real-time translation, and user-facing applications where response time directly impacts experience. For batch processing, background summarization, or offline analysis, latency is less critical.

Example Use Cases

Code generation & review

Based on overall model capabilities and architecture for coding tasks like generating functions, debugging, and refactoring

Qwen3.5-122B-A10B

Customer support chatbot

Suitable for user-facing chat with competitive response times. GLM 5.3 Flash (batch) also offers lower per-token costs for high-volume support

Qwen3.5-122B-A10B

Long document analysis

Larger context window (1049K tokens) can process longer documents, contracts, and research papers in a single pass

GLM 5.3 Flash (batch)

Batch data extraction

Lower output pricing ($0.25/M) reduces costs when processing thousands of records daily

GLM 5.3 Flash (batch)

Creative writing & content

Higher overall composite score (78/100) correlates with better nuance, coherence, and style in long-form content

GLM 5.3 Flash (batch)

Image understanding & OCR

Supports vision input - can analyze screenshots, diagrams, photos, and scanned documents directly

Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
Which Should You Choose?
Our recommendation:
GLM 5.3 Flash (batch)

Qwen3.5-122B-A10B and GLM 5.3 Flash (batch) are extremely close in overall performance (only 0.09999999999999432 points apart). Your best choice depends entirely on which specific strengths matter most for your use case.

by Alibaba

  • Choose for Quality - Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
  • Choose for Reliability - Higher uptime and faster response speeds
  • Choose for Prototyping - Stronger community support and better developer experience
  • Choose for Production - Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale

by Zhipu AI

  • Choose for Cost - 88% lower pricing; better value at scale
Capability Comparison
CapabilityQwen3.5-122B-A10BGLM 5.3 Flash (batch)
Vision (Image Input)
Function Calling
Streaming
JSON Mode
Reasoning
Web Search
Image Output
Monthly Cost Calculator
1,000tokens (600 in / 400 out)
100requests/day (3,000/month)

Qwen3.5-122B-A10B

Alibaba

$3.40
estimated monthly cost

GLM 5.3 Flash (batch)

Zhipu AI

Best Value
$0.4350
estimated monthly cost

GLM 5.3 Flash (batch) saves you $2.97/month

That's 87% cheaper than Qwen3.5-122B-A10B at 1,000 tokens/request and 100 requests/day.

Assumes 60% input / 40% output token ratio per request. Actual costs may vary based on your usage pattern.

Parameters & Context
ParameterQwen3.5-122B-A10BGLM 5.3 Flash (batch)
Context Window262K1.0M
Max Output Tokens81,920943,718
Open SourceYesYes
CreatedFeb 25, 2026Aug 26, 2026
Last updated: 29m ago

Related comparisons

Qwen3.5-122B-A10B vs GLM 5.3 Flash (batch) (2026) | LM Market Cap