新用戶 免費註冊,送 10 次呼叫,最高 $1,免綁卡。

GLM-5.3-Flash vs Qwen3.7 Plus

vs

何時用哪一個

兩者皆具有 1,000,000-token 的上下文視窗,並接受文字、影像與影片輸入,返回文字,因此差異在於價格與控制。若需較便宜的長上下文作業,請選擇 glm-5.3-flash —— 輸入 $0.15 且輸出 $0.5,比 qwen3.7-plus 的 $0.4 與 $1.6 大約便宜 2.7x 與 3.2x —— 加上大得多的 163840-token 最大輸出與明確的視覺旗標,但需接受其思考功能無法關閉。當您需要停用思考功能,或需以其 $1.6 的思考輸入費率分開編列推理預算,且 65536 個輸出 token 已足夠時,請選擇 qwen3.7-plus。

Benchmark 成績

高於同儕均值無人分數更高GLM-5.3-Flash5 / 61 / 6Qwen3.7 Plus7 / 125 / 12
GLM-5.3-Flash Qwen3.7 Plus 其他被測模型 同儕均值 無人分數更高
SWE-Bench Pro
N/A
57.6%
ScreenSpot-Pro
N/A
無人分數更高 79%
GDPval-AA v2 Elo · 1504-1773 據 Z.ai 公布 · 2026-09-04
無人分數更高 1773
N/A
Humanity's Last Exam no tools
N/A
34.7%
Agents' Last Exam
26.3%
N/A
BabyVision
N/A
無人分數更高 64.7%

廠商公布: Alibaba (Qwen) Anthropic ByteDance DeepSeek Google MiniMax Moonshot OpenAI Tencent Z.ai

定價

GLM-5.3-Flash Qwen3.7 Plus Δ
輸入 / 1M tokens $0.15 $0.4 0.37×
輸出 / 1M tokens $0.5 $1.6 0.31×
快取讀取 / 1M tokens $0.03 $0.08 0.38×
快取寫入 - 1.25x -

費率取自建置時的即時目錄;各模型頁面皆附有目前的費率卡。

它們的相對位置 — 在此計費單位下,所有 67 個 聊天 模型的 每 1M tokens 的輸入價格(對數尺度)

GLM-5.3-Flash · $0.15 Qwen3.7 Plus · $0.4
$0.05 · Qwen3 VL Flash $30 · GPT-5.4 Pro

能力

GLM-5.3-Flash Qwen3.7 Plus
工具使用
思考控制 常駐開啟 可配置
結構化輸出
提示快取 隱式(自動) 隱式 + 顯式
快取生命週期 未公開 explicit: 5m, reset on hit
最小快取前綴 未公開 1024 個 token

規格

GLM-5.3-Flash Qwen3.7 Plus
輸入模態 文字 影像 影片 文字 影像 影片
輸出模態 文字 文字
發布日期 - 2026-06-01
上下文視窗 1M 1M
最大輸出 164K 66K
思考參數 reasoning_effort
  • enable_thinking
  • thinking_budget
  • preserve_thinking
可接受的值
reasoning_effort
  • low
  • high
  • max
enable_thinking
  • true
  • false
thinking_budget
  • in tokens
preserve_thinking
  • true
  • false
預設值 max

on

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

規格摘錄自各供應商的文件;供應商未發布的資料列會直接省略,而非自行推測。 完整來源: GLM-5.3-Flash · Qwen3.7 Plus

單一提示詞,兩款模型 — 經由閘道測量

提示詞 Explain to a CFO, in exactly three sentences, why our LLM bill doubled after we enabled reasoning. 檢查 恰好 3 句

GLM-5.3-Flash 通過 · 3 sentences

Enabling reasoning means the model now generates thousands of invisible "thinking" tokens before each visible answer, and we're billed for those hidden tokens at full output rates—our most expensive tier. Since output tokens cost 3–5x more than input tokens, that hidden thinking volume compounds across every request, which is why the bill doubled rather than edged up. If the spend concerns you, the fix is straightforward: route only complex queries to reasoning models and keep simple tasks on standard ones, which can reclaim a meaningful share of that cost without losing accuracy where it matters.

輸出 742 tok (+626 思考) 延遲 23.2 s

Qwen3.7 Plus 通過 · 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.

輸出 1428 tok (+1345 思考) 延遲 25.2 s

指令遵循(恰好三句,可數)、受眾適配(面向 CFO 的語氣),以及下方 token 計量所暴露的隱藏思考計費缺口。

提示詞 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. 檢查 修復通過測試

GLM-5.3-Flash 通過 · 8/8 cases

```python def longest_run(xs): if not xs: return 0 best = cur = 1 for i in range(1, len(xs)): if xs[i] == xs[i - 1]: cur += 1 best = max(best, cur) else: cur = 1 return best ``` **The bug:** `cur` is supposed to hold the length of the current run, but it's seeded with `0` and reset to `0` on a mismatch instead of `1` — and since the loop starts at index 1, the first element of every run never passes through the `==` branch and so never gets counted at all. That means `cur` actually holds *run length minus 1* for every run, so every run is underreported by one: a single-element input never enters the loop and returns 0 instead of 1, and a run of length n returns n − 1 (e.g., `[3, 3, 3]` returns 2). […]

輸出 2462 tok (+2138 思考) 延遲 29.1 s

Qwen3.7 Plus 通過 · 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. […]

輸出 2317 tok (+2005 思考) 延遲 40.5 s

修復是否真的正確(可執行)、解釋的資訊密度,以及在一個邊界明確的任務上的 token 效率。

提示詞 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. 檢查 合法 JSON,schema 精確

GLM-5.3-Flash 通過 · 5/5 fields, guidance "Withheld pending the Q4 close"

```json { "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "September quarter", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": 11, "guidance": "Withheld pending the Q4 close" } ``` Notes on judgment calls: revenue of 412 is on a constant-currency basis as stated; growth of "eleven and change" is approximated as 11 since no precise figure is given.

輸出 717 tok (+616 思考) 延遲 9.1 s

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

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

輸出 1807 tok (+1750 思考) 延遲 31.6 s

schema 服從度(不臆造欄位)、幻覺壓力(guidance 明確被暫緩給出),以及結構化輸出路徑的差異。

提示詞 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. 檢查 120 詞,0 個禁用詞

GLM-5.3-Flash 通過 · 120 words, 0 banned, 1 question

Introducing Cross-Provider Prompt Cache, the newest feature in our API gateway. Today, teams send identical prompts to multiple LLM providers and pay full price each time. Why duplicate that work and cost? With Cross-Provider Prompt Cache, your gateway stores prompt-response pairs and serves repeated requests from cache, regardless of which provider handles the call. The result: lower latency, reduced spend, and consistent outputs across OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, and self-hosted models. Configure cache policies per route, set TTLs, and invalidate entries instantly through the dashboard or API. Built-in analytics show hit rates and savings in real time. Enable the cache with a single flag, no code changes required. Available today on all paid plans. Contact sales for enterprise volume pricing details.

輸出 2095 tok (+1937 思考) 延遲 20.2 s

Qwen3.7 Plus 通過 · 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.

輸出 4453 tok (+4312 思考) 延遲 76.8 s

約束服從度(字數預算、禁用詞表、唯一的那句問句)、文風指紋,以及長度控制。

只需一行程式碼即可在兩者間切換

以下每個頁籤中都有這兩個 ID — 醒目提示的這兩行是唯一的修改處。相同的端點,相同的金鑰,相同的請求結構。

from openai import OpenAI

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

resp = client.chat.completions.create(
    model="glm-5.3-flash",
    # model="qwen3.7-plus",  # 取消註解此行,並註解上一行
    messages=[{"role": "user", "content": "Summarize this diff"}],
    reasoning_effort="medium",
)
print(resp.choices[0].message.content)

取得 API 金鑰 →

常見問題

GLM-5.3-Flash 和 Qwen3.7 Plus 哪個比較便宜?

GLM-5.3-Flash 在 輸入 / 1m tokens 上較便宜($0.15 對比 $0.4,相差 2.7×)。其他項目可能呈現相反結果 — 上表提供完整資訊,實際成本取決於您的使用組合。

我可以在不進行兩次整合的情況下,對 GLM-5.3-Flash 和 Qwen3.7 Plus 進行 A/B 測試嗎?

可以。兩者皆透過同一個相容 OpenAI 的端點提供服務,並使用同一把 API 金鑰 — 切換只需更改一行的模型字串,因此您可以將部分流量分別導向兩者並直接比較帳單。

GLM-5.3-Flash 與 Qwen3.7 Plus 支援提示快取嗎?

是的 — 兩者的快取讀取費率皆低於其輸入費率,因此具有暖前綴的工作負載成本會低於牌價所示。確切的快取讀取列請見上方的定價表。

相關比較