| Signal | Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking | Delta | GLM 4.5 Air (free) |
|---|---|---|---|
Capabilities | 67 | +17 | |
Benchmarks | 63 | +63 | |
Pricing | 1 | -29 | |
Context window size | 81 | -- | |
Recency | 96 | +9 | |
Output Capacity | 75 | -8 | |
| Overall Result | 3 wins | of 6 | 2 wins |
8
days higher
3
days
19
days higher
Alibaba
Zhipu AI
GLM 4.5 Air (free) saves you $48.75/month
That's $585.00/year compared to Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking at your current usage level of 100K calls/month.
| Metric | Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking | GLM 4.5 Air (free) | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Score | 72 | 73 | GLM 4.5 Air (free) |
| Rank | #143 | #142 | GLM 4.5 Air (free) |
| Quality Rank | #143 | #142 | GLM 4.5 Air (free) |
| Adoption Rank | #143 | #142 | GLM 4.5 Air (free) |
| Parameters | 80B | -- | -- |
| Context Window | 131K | 131K | -- |
| Pricing | $0.10/$0.78/M | Free | -- |
| Signal Scores | |||
| Capabilities | 67 | 50 | Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking |
| Benchmarks | 63 | -- | Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking |
| Pricing | 1 | 30 | GLM 4.5 Air (free) |
| Context window size | 81 | 81 | Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking |
| Recency | 96 | 88 | Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking |
| Output Capacity | 75 | 83 | GLM 4.5 Air (free) |
Our composite score (0–100) combines six weighted signals: benchmark performance (25%), pricing efficiency (25%), context window size (15%), model recency (15%), output capacity (10%), and capability versatility (10%). Here's what the scores mean for these two models:
Scores 72/100 (rank #143), placing it in the top 51% of all 290 models tracked.
Scores 73/100 (rank #142), placing it in the top 51% of all 290 models tracked.
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.
Both models are priced similarly, so the decision comes down to quality and features rather than cost.
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.
Code generation & review
Higher benchmark score (0/100) indicates stronger performance on coding tasks like generating functions, debugging, and refactoring
Customer support chatbot
Faster response time (speed score 0/100) is critical for user-facing chat. GLM 4.5 Air (free) also offers lower per-token costs for high-volume support
Long document analysis
Larger context window (131K tokens) can process longer documents, contracts, and research papers in a single pass
Batch data extraction
Lower output pricing ($0.00/M) reduces costs when processing thousands of records daily
Creative writing & content
Higher overall composite score (73/100) correlates with better nuance, coherence, and style in long-form content
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking and GLM 4.5 Air (free) 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.
Best for Quality
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking
Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
Best for Cost
GLM 4.5 Air (free)
100% lower pricing; better value at scale
Best for Reliability
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking
Higher uptime and faster response speeds
Best for Prototyping
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking
Stronger community support and better developer experience
Best for Production
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking
Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale
by Alibaba
| Capability | Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking | GLM 4.5 Air (free) |
|---|---|---|
| Vision (Image Input) | ||
| Function Calling | ||
| Streaming | ||
| JSON Modediffers | ||
| Reasoning | ||
| Web Search | ||
| Image Output |
Alibaba
Zhipu AI
GLM 4.5 Air (free) saves you $1.11/month
That's 100% cheaper than Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking 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.
| Parameter | Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking | GLM 4.5 Air (free) |
|---|---|---|
| Context Window | 131K | 131K |
| Max Output Tokens | 32,768 | 96,000 |
| Open Source | Yes | Yes |
| Created | Sep 11, 2025 | Jul 25, 2025 |
GLM 4.5 Air (free) scores 73/100 (rank #142) compared to Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking's 72/100 (rank #143), giving it a 0-point advantage. GLM 4.5 Air (free) is the stronger overall choice, though Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking may excel in specific areas like certain benchmarks.
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking is ranked #143 and GLM 4.5 Air (free) is ranked #142 out of 290+ AI models. Rankings use a composite score combining benchmark performance (25%), pricing (25%), context window (15%), recency (15%), output capacity (10%), and versatility (10%). Scores update hourly.
GLM 4.5 Air (free) is cheaper at $0.00/M output tokens vs Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking's $0.78/M output tokens - 780.0x more expensive. Input token pricing: Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking at $0.10/M vs GLM 4.5 Air (free) at $0.00/M.
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking has a larger context window of 131,072 tokens compared to GLM 4.5 Air (free)'s 131,072 tokens. A larger context window means the model can process longer documents and conversations.