新帳號 免費註冊,送 10 次呼叫,最高 $1,免綁卡。

GLM-5 vs Qwen3.7 Plus

vs

什麼情況選哪一個

qwen3.7-plus 是更便宜、更寬的預設選擇:輸入 $0.4、輸出 $1.6 對 glm-5 的 $1 和 $3.2,輸入便宜 2.5 倍、輸出便宜 2 倍,快取讀取 $0.08 對 $0.2,上下文 1000000 token 對 200000,還接受圖像和影片加文字。兩者都有聊天、程式碼、推理、工具和長上下文標誌,都可關閉思考。需要單次回覆超過 65536 token(glm-5 最多允許 131072),或已鎖定在 GLM 家族時選 glm-5。

Benchmark 成績

領先高於平均沒有模型更高GLM-5015 / 522 / 52Qwen3.7 Plus911 / 244 / 24

兩邊都有成績的有 9 項。

GLM-5 Qwen3.7 Plus 其他有成績的模型 其他模型平均 ★ 沒有模型分數更高
SWE-Bench Pro
55.1%
55.8%
OSWorld 2.0 partial
N/A
21.5%
Cybergym
43.2%
N/A
JobBench
N/A
27.6%
GPQA Diamond
86%
90.3%
ERQA
N/A
69.8%
MCP-Mark
31.1%
58.7%
LVBench
N/A
76.2%

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

定價

GLM-5 Qwen3.7 Plus Δ
輸入 / 1M tokens $1 $0.4 2.5×
輸出 / 1M tokens $3.2 $1.6 2×
快取讀取 / 1M tokens $0.2 $0.08 2.5×
快取寫入 - 1.25x -

費率取自網站建置時的即時目錄;各模型頁面都列有最新的價目。

兩者的相對位置:每 1M tokens 的輸入價格,涵蓋同一計費單位下全部 78 個聊天模型(對數尺度)

GLM-5 · $1 Qwen3.7 Plus · $0.4
$0.05 · Qwen3 VL Flash $30 · GPT-5.4 Pro

功能

GLM-5 Qwen3.7 Plus
工具使用 是 是
思考控制 可設定 可設定
結構化輸出 是 是
提示詞快取 隱式(自動) 隱式 + 顯式
快取存活時間 未公布 explicit: 5m, reset on hit
最小快取前綴 未公布 1024 個 token

規格

GLM-5 Qwen3.7 Plus
輸入模態 文字 文字 圖像 影片
輸出模態 文字 文字
發布日期 2026-02-12 2026-06-01
上下文視窗 200K 1M
最大輸出 131K 66K
思考參數 thinking.type
  • enable_thinking
  • thinking_budget
  • preserve_thinking
可接受的值
thinking.type
  • enabled
  • disabled
enable_thinking
  • true
  • false
thinking_budget
  • in tokens
preserve_thinking
  • true
  • false
預設值 enabled, and on GLM-5 the model automatically determines whether to think

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;供應商沒有公布的項目就直接略過,不自行推測。 完整來源: GLM-5 · Qwen3.7 Plus

同一段提示詞,兩個模型,經閘道實測

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 通過 · 3 sentences

Enabling reasoning forces the model to perform multiple hidden steps to "think" through a problem, drastically increasing the volume of data processed per query compared to a standard response. Because our billing is directly tied to this processing volume, the additional computational work required for higher accuracy has proportionally doubled our consumption. Essentially, the spike reflects a trade-off where we are paying a higher variable cost to secure significantly better analytical outcomes.

輸出 1393 tok (+1308 思考) 延遲 36.0 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

是否照指令做(剛好三句,數得出來)、語氣是否貼合對象(寫給 CFO 看),以及下方 token 計量顯示出的隱藏思考計費落差。

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 修正後通過測試

GLM-5 通過 · 8/8 cases

Here is the 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 best = max(best, cur) else: cur = 1 return best ``` **Explanation:** The bug stems from initializing `best` and `cur` to zero, which causes the function to count the number of *transitions* between adjacent elements rather than the total number of items in the run, resulting in a return value that is always one less than the actual length (reporting 0 for a single element and 1 for a pair). By initializing the counters to 1 and resetting `cur` to 1 when a streak breaks, the logic correctly counts the items themselves; adding an explicit check for an empty list ensures the function handles the zero-element edge case correctly.

輸出 2907 tok (+2694 思考) 延遲 73.7 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

修正是否真的正確(跑得起來)、說明的資訊密度,以及在範圍明確的任務上的 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 有效的 JSON,完全符合 schema

GLM-5 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" } ```

輸出 3620 tok (+3561 思考) 延遲 91.8 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

是否遵守 schema(不自創欄位)、面對幻覺誘因的表現(題目明確不給 guidance),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 通過 · 119 words, 0 banned, 1 question

We are thrilled to introduce Global Prompt Caching, a powerful new capability within our API gateway designed to optimize your AI operations. By intelligently storing prompt responses across every supported provider, this feature drastically reduces latency and cuts operational costs. Instead of processing identical requests repeatedly, our system serves cached results instantly, ensuring consistent performance even during high-traffic periods. Why pay full price for repeated inference on the same inputs? This update gives developers fine-grained control over cache lifetimes and hit rates, allowing for predictable budgeting and faster application response times. You can activate this functionality directly in your dashboard settings today. Start maximizing your efficiency now and deliver a snappier experience to your end-users without unnecessary API expenditure.

輸出 715 tok (+571 思考) 延遲 18.9 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

是否遵守限制(字數上限、禁用詞清單、只能有一句問句)、文字風格的特徵,以及長度控制。

改一行程式碼就能在兩者之間切換

下面每個頁籤都列了這兩個模型 ID,要改的只有醒目標示的那兩行。端點、金鑰和請求格式都不變。

from openai import OpenAI

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

resp = client.chat.completions.create(
    model="glm-5",
    # model="qwen3.7-plus",  # 取消這一行的註解,並把上一行註解掉
    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 和 Qwen3.7 Plus 哪個比較便宜?

以「輸入 / 1M tokens」來看,Qwen3.7 Plus 比較便宜($0.4 對 $1,相差 2.5×)。其他項目的結果可能相反,完整價目請看上表;實際成本要看你的用量組合。

可以只串接一次,就對 GLM-5 和 Qwen3.7 Plus 做 A/B 測試嗎?

可以。兩個模型都走同一個 OpenAI 相容端點,用的也是同一把 API 金鑰,切換時只要改一行裡的模型名稱字串。你可以把一部分流量分別導到兩邊,再直接比較帳單。

GLM-5 與 Qwen3.7 Plus 支援提示詞快取嗎?

支援。兩者的快取讀取費率都低於輸入費率,所以前綴已經進快取的工作負載,實際成本會比官網價算出來的低。確切的快取讀取價格請見上方定價表。

相關比較