新人 免费注册,送 10 次调用,最高 $1,无需绑卡。

GLM-5.1 vs Qwen3.7 Plus

vs

什么时候选哪个

两者都是输出文本的推理模型,带工具、代码和可选思考,所以差别主要在价格、上下文和输入:qwen3.7-plus 输入 $0.4、输出 $1.6,对比 glm-5.1 的 $1.4 和 $4.4,即 Z.ai 这款每输入 token 贵 3.5 倍、每输出 token 贵 2.75 倍;而且它还带 1000000 token 窗口(是 glm-5.1 的 200000 的 5 倍)以及图像和视频输入。低成本大批量工作、超大文档,或任何带图像或视频的任务选 qwen3.7-plus;需要单次回复超过 65536 token 时选 glm-5.1,它允许最多 131072。

Benchmark 成绩

GLM-5.1:供应商没有公布 benchmark 成绩。

高于同类均值无更高分Qwen3.7 Plus11 / 244 / 24
GLM-5.1 Qwen3.7 Plus 其他参测模型 同类均值 ★ 没有模型得分更高
SWE-Bench Pro
N/A
55.8%
OSWorld 2.0 partial
N/A
21.5%
JobBench
N/A
27.6%
GPQA Diamond
N/A
90.3%
ERQA
N/A
69.8%
Agents' Last Exam Pass
N/A
13.2%
LVBench
N/A
76.2%

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

价格

GLM-5.1 Qwen3.7 Plus Δ
输入 / 1M token $1.4 $0.4 3.5×
输出 / 1M token $4.4 $1.6 2.8×
缓存读取 / 1M token $0.26 $0.08 3.3×
缓存写入 - 1.25x -

价格取自构建时的实时目录,最新价格见各模型页面。

两个模型所处的位置:全部 76 个按同一单位计费的聊天模型的每 1M token 输入价分布(对数刻度)

GLM-5.1 · $1.4 Qwen3.7 Plus · $0.4
$0.05 · Qwen3 VL Flash $30 · GPT-5.4 Pro

能力

GLM-5.1 Qwen3.7 Plus
工具调用 是 是
思考控制 可配置 可配置
结构化输出 是 是
提示词缓存 隐式(自动) 隐式 + 显式
缓存有效期 未公布 explicit: 5m, reset on hit
最小缓存前缀 未公布 1024 个 token

规格

GLM-5.1 Qwen3.7 Plus
输入模态 文本 文本 图像 视频
输出模态 文本 文本
发布日期 2026-04-07 2026-06-01
上下文窗口 200K 1M
最大输出 131K 66K
思考参数 thinking.type
  • enable_thinking
  • thinking_budget
  • preserve_thinking
可选值
thinking.type
  • enabled
  • disabled
enable_thinking
  • true
  • false
thinking_budget
  • in tokens
preserve_thinking
  • true
  • false
默认值 enabled, and 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

规格照录自各供应商的文档;供应商没有公布的项目,对应的行直接省略,不做推断。 完整来源: GLM-5.1 · Qwen3.7 Plus

同一条提示词,两个模型,经网关实测

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

GLM-5.1 通过 · 3 sentences

Enabling reasoning shifts the LLM from generating quick answers to producing hidden "chain-of-thought" tokens that systematically explore multiple solution paths before responding. Because billing is based on total tokens processed, these invisible reasoning tokens drastically increase input and output volume per query, often adding thousands of compute-intensive tokens to a single prompt. Consequently, our bill doubled not from higher per-token rates or increased user volume, but from the exponentially deeper computational work required to deliver higher-quality, more reliable outputs.

输出 98 tok 延迟 7.8 s

Qwen3.7 Plus 通过 · 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.

输出 1428 tok (+1345 思考) 延迟 25.2 s

指令遵循(恰好三句,数得出来)、受众适配(对 CFO 说话的口吻),以及下方 token 计数暴露出的隐藏思考计费差额。

提示词 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. 检查 修复通过测试

GLM-5.1 通过 · 8/8 cases

```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 original function initialized `cur` and `best` to `0` and only incremented `cur` when a duplicate was found. This counts the number of *extra* equal items in a run rather than the total run length, so every run is reported as one shorter than it actually is—returning `0` for single-element lists and `L-1` for a run of length `L` (including those ending at the last index). The fix initializes `cur` and `best` to `1` (when the list is non‑empty) and resets `cur` to `1` on a mismatch, so `cur` tracks the full length of the current run and `best` records the true maximum.

输出 3823 tok (+3585 思考) 延迟 49.7 s

Qwen3.7 Plus 通过 · 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. […]

输出 2317 tok (+2005 思考) 延迟 40.5 s

修复是否真的正确(能运行)、解释的信息密度,以及在一个范围明确的任务上的 token 效率。

提示词 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. 检查 合法 JSON,严格符合 schema

GLM-5.1 通过 · 5/5 fields, guidance "withheld pending the Q4 close"

```json { "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "September quarter", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": "eleven and change", "guidance": "withheld pending the Q4 close" } ```

输出 1091 tok (+1028 思考) 延迟 15.2 s

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

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

输出 1807 tok (+1750 思考) 延迟 31.6 s

是否严守 schema(不臆造字段)、能否顶住幻觉压力(原文明说暂不给出 guidance),以及结构化输出路径的差异。

提示词 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. 检查 120 词,0 个禁用词

GLM-5.1 通过 · 120 words, 0 banned, 1 question

We are excited to introduce Prompt Cache for our API Gateway. This new feature stores responses for identical prompts, routing subsequent requests directly to the cache instead of calling the underlying AI provider. Are you tired of paying multiple times for the exact same query? Prompt Cache solves this by recognizing duplicate inputs across all supported providers, drastically reducing latency and operational costs. When a user submits a request that matches a previously cached prompt, the gateway returns the stored answer instantly. You can configure cache expiration and scope rules via your dashboard to maintain data freshness. Stop wasting budget on redundant computational work. Upgrade to the latest gateway tier today to start saving time and money on every call.

输出 3935 tok (+3802 思考) 延迟 41.1 s

Qwen3.7 Plus 通过 · 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.

输出 4453 tok (+4312 思考) 延迟 76.8 s

是否守住约束(字数预算、禁用词表、只能有一个问句)、文风特征,以及长度控制。

改一行代码就能在两个模型之间切换

下方每个标签页里都有两个模型 ID,高亮的那两行是唯一要改的地方。端点不变,API key 不变,请求结构也不变。

from openai import OpenAI

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

resp = client.chat.completions.create(
    model="glm-5.1",
    # model="qwen3.7-plus",  # 取消注释此行,注释上一行
    messages=[{"role": "user", "content": "Summarize this diff"}],
    reasoning_effort="medium",
)
print(resp.choices[0].message.content)

获取 API key →

常见问题

GLM-5.1 和 Qwen3.7 Plus 哪个更便宜?

按「输入 / 1M token」算,Qwen3.7 Plus 更便宜($0.4 对 $1.4,相差 3.5×)。其他计费项的结论可能相反,完整价格见上方表格,实际成本取决于你的用量构成。

不用分别集成两次,就能对 GLM-5.1 和 Qwen3.7 Plus 做 A/B 测试吗?

可以。两个模型走同一个 OpenAI 兼容端点,用同一个 API key,切换时只要改一行里的模型名,所以可以给两个模型各分一部分流量,直接对比账单。

GLM-5.1 和 Qwen3.7 Plus 支持提示词缓存吗?

支持。两个模型的缓存读取价都低于各自的输入价,所以前缀能反复命中缓存的负载,实际成本会比按官网价估算的低。具体的缓存读取价见上方价格表。

相关对比

我们的实测研究