🎁 New Sign up free, 10 calls on us. Up to $1, no card needed.

GLM-5.2 vs Qwen3.7 Plus

vs

Which one, when — curated verdict, not a benchmark table

Both share a 1000000-token context window, the same chat, code, reasoning, tools and long-context flags, and both let you turn thinking off, so the real split is price, output length and input types. qwen3.7-plus costs $0.4 input and $1.6 output against $0.77 and $2.42 for glm-5.2 — 1.9x cheaper on input and 1.5x on output — and it also accepts image and video input, making it the default for cheap high-volume or multimodal work. Pick glm-5.2 when you need a single response longer than 65536 tokens, since it allows up to 131072.

Pricing

GLM-5.2 Qwen3.7 Plus Δ
Input / 1M tokens $0.77 $0.4 1.9×
Output / 1M tokens $2.42 $1.6 1.5×
Cache read / 1M tokens $0.143 $0.08 1.8×
Cache write 1.25x

Rates from the live catalog at build time; each model page carries the current card.

Where they sit — input price per 1M tokens across all 63 chat models on this billing unit (log scale)

GLM-5.2 · $0.77 Qwen3.7 Plus · $0.4
$0.05 · Qwen3 VL Flash $30 · GPT-5.4 Pro

Capabilities

GLM-5.2 Qwen3.7 Plus
Tool use yes yes
Thinking control configurable configurable
Structured output yes yes
Prompt caching implicit (automatic) implicit + explicit
Cache lifetime not published explicit: 5m, reset on hit
Minimum cached prefix not published 1024 tokens

Specs

GLM-5.2 Qwen3.7 Plus
Input modalities text text image video
Output modalities text text
Released 2026-06-16 2026-06-01
Context window 1M 1M
Max output 131K 66K
Thinking parameter
  • thinking.type
  • reasoning_effort
  • enable_thinking
  • thinking_budget
  • preserve_thinking
Accepted values
thinking.type
  • enabled
  • disabled
reasoning_effort
  • none
  • minimal
  • low
  • medium
  • high
  • xhigh
  • max (none and minimal skip thinking, low and medium map to high, xhigh maps to max)
enable_thinking
  • true
  • false
thinking_budget
  • in tokens
preserve_thinking
  • true
  • false
Default enabled, with reasoning_effort at max: the only GLM with an effort dial, and it defaults to the top of it

on

the Qwen3.7 Plus series is hybrid thinking with thinking enabled by default, and preserve_thinking is off

Specs are transcribed from each vendor’s documentation; a row a vendor does not publish is left out rather than inferred. Full sources: GLM-5.2 · Qwen3.7 Plus

One prompt, both models — measured through the gateway

PROMPT Explain to a CFO, in exactly three sentences, why our LLM bill doubled after we enabled reasoning. CHECK exactly 3 sentences

GLM-5.2 passed · 3 sentences

Enabling reasoning means the LLM now generates thousands of invisible "thinking" tokens to systematically work through complex problems before producing a final answer. Because our cloud providers bill for these internal processing steps at the same rate as standard output, our billable token volume per query has doubled. While this increases our direct API costs, it drastically reduces error rates and manual review labor, ultimately lowering our total cost per resolved transaction.

out 1223 tok (+1138 thinking) latency 17.1 s

Qwen3.7 Plus passed · 3 sentences

Enabling reasoning requires the model to generate extensive internal "thinking" tokens to process complex logic before delivering a final answer. Because our vendor charges us per token consumed, this hidden computational overhead effectively doubles our output volume for the exact same number of user requests. Consequently, our costs have doubled because we are now paying for the model's increased processing time to achieve higher-quality, more accurate results.

out 1428 tok (+1345 thinking) latency 25.2 s

Instruction following (exactly three sentences — countable), audience shaping (CFO register), and the hidden-thinking billing gap the token meters below expose.

PROMPT This function is supposed to return the longest run of consecutive equal items, but callers report it is off by one on single-element inputs and misses runs that end at the last index. Fix it and explain the bug in one paragraph. CHECK fix passes tests

GLM-5.2 missed · 1/8 cases (fails [1])

```python def longest_run(xs): if not xs: return 0 best = 1 cur = 1 for i in range(1, len(xs)): if xs[i] == xs[i - 1]: cur += 1 […]

out 4097 tok (+4036 thinking) latency 58.4 s

Qwen3.7 Plus passed · 8/8 cases

## Fixed Code ```python def longest_run(xs): if not xs: return 0 best = 1 cur = 1 for i in range(1, len(xs)): if xs[i] == xs[i - 1]: cur += 1 else: cur = 1 best = max(best, cur) return best ``` ## Bug Explanation The function has two related bugs rooted in how it counts run lengths. First, `cur` is initialized to `0` and only incremented on matches, so it counts the number of *transitions* between equal elements rather than the total elements in the run—a run of N identical items only reaches `cur = N − 1`, undercounting by one. This also causes the single-element case to return `0`, since the loop never executes and `cur` never increments. […]

out 2317 tok (+2005 thinking) latency 40.5 s

Whether the fix is actually correct (runnable), explanation density, and token efficiency on a bounded task.

PROMPT Extract a JSON object with fields {company, quarter, revenue_usd_m, growth_pct, guidance} from this text. Use null for anything not stated; add no other fields. CHECK valid JSON, schema exact

GLM-5.2 passed · 5/5 fields, guidance "withheld"

```json { "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "September quarter", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": 11, "guidance": "withheld" } ```

out 1947 tok (+1893 thinking) latency 30.9 s

Qwen3.7 Plus passed · 5/5 fields, guidance null

{ "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "September", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": 11, "guidance": null }

out 1807 tok (+1750 thinking) latency 31.6 s

Schema obedience (no invented fields), hallucination pressure (guidance is explicitly withheld), and structured-output path differences.

PROMPT Write a 120-word product announcement for an API gateway feature that caches prompts across providers. Forbidden words: "seamless", "unlock", "game-changer", "revolutionize", "empower". Exactly one sentence must be a question. CHECK 120 words, 0 banned words

GLM-5.2 passed · 120 words, 0 banned, 1 question

We are introducing Caching for our API Gateway, the smartest way to optimize your workflows. Why pay for the exact same response twice? Now, you can automatically store and reuse prompt results across multiple AI providers, drastically reducing latency and overall operational costs. If a user submits a duplicate query, the gateway serves the cached answer instantly, regardless of whether you route to OpenAI, Anthropic, or others. This directly translates to faster applications and significantly lower monthly API bills. You can easily configure your specific caching rules within the developer dashboard and watch your efficiency soar. Stop wasting your valuable tokens on completely redundant computations. Upgrade to the latest gateway version today and experience the future of intelligent prompt management.

out 11125 tok (+10984 thinking) latency 114.8 s

Qwen3.7 Plus passed · 120 words, 0 banned, 1 question

Introducing PromptCache, our new API gateway feature designed to store and reuse prompts across multiple artificial intelligence providers. Have you ever noticed how repeatedly sending identical queries drains your budget and increases latency? PromptCache solves this by intelligently storing responses at the gateway level. When your application requests the same prompt from a different provider, the system instantly returns the cached result. This drastically reduces API costs and accelerates response times for your users. You can configure custom expiration times and set specific fallback rules for each vendor. You must stop paying twice for the exact same computation. Please upgrade your entire infrastructure today and experience much faster and cheaper integrations without changing a single line of your application code.

out 4453 tok (+4312 thinking) latency 76.8 s

Constraint obedience (word budget, banned-word list, the single question), style fingerprint, and length control.

Switch between them with one line

Both ids are in every tab below — the highlighted pair of lines is the only edit. Same endpoint, same key, same request shape.

from openai import OpenAI

client = OpenAI(
    base_url="https://synthorai.io/v1",
    api_key="sk-syn-...",
)

resp = client.chat.completions.create(
    model="glm-5.2",
    # model="qwen3.7-plus",  # uncomment this line, comment the one above
    messages=[{"role": "user", "content": "Summarize this diff"}],
    reasoning_effort="medium",
)
print(resp.choices[0].message.content)

Get an API key →

FAQ

Which is cheaper, GLM-5.2 or Qwen3.7 Plus?

Qwen3.7 Plus is cheaper on input / 1m tokens ($0.4 vs $0.77, 1.9× apart). Other rows may point the other way — the table above carries the full card, and real cost depends on your mix.

Can I A/B test GLM-5.2 against Qwen3.7 Plus without two integrations?

Yes. Both are served through the same OpenAI-compatible endpoint with one API key — switching is a one-line model-string change, so you can route a fraction of traffic to each and compare bills directly.

Do GLM-5.2 and Qwen3.7 Plus support prompt caching?

Yes — both bill cached reads below their input rate, so warm-prefix workloads cost less than the list rates suggest. The exact cache-read rows are in the pricing table above.

Related comparisons

From our measured studies