Z.AI: GLM 4 32B vs Qwen: Qwen3.5 122B A10B
Compare Z.AI: GLM 4 32B by Zhipu AI against Qwen: Qwen3.5 122B A10B by Qwen, context windows of 128K vs 262K, tested across 53 shared challenges.
Our Verdict
Z.AI: GLM 4 32B
Qwen: Qwen3.5 122B A10B
No community votes yet. On paper, these are closely matched - try both with your actual task to see which fits your workflow.
Z.AI: GLM 4 32B is 32x cheaper per token — worth considering if cost matters.
Too close to call
API pricing
Cost per 1M tokens
Z.AI: GLM 4 32B
Input
$0.10
4.0× cheaper
Output
$0.10
32× cheaper
Qwen: Qwen3.5 122B A10B
Input
$0.40
Output
$3.20
Z.AI: GLM 4 32B is cheaper on both — 4.0× input, 32× output
Writing DNA
Style Comparison
Similarity
51%
Qwen: Qwen3.5 122B A10B uses 10.4x more emoji
Z.AI: GLM 4 32B
Qwen: Qwen3.5 122B A10B
53%Vocabulary49%
15wSentence Length15w
0.83Hedging0.29
5.8Bold6.2
4.6Lists4.8
0.00Emoji0.10
0.35Headings0.88
0.04Transitions0.20
Based on 17 + 24 text responses
Research
What we learned reading every model
FAQ
