GLM 5.2vsQwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking is cheaper than GLM 5.2 at $0.15/M vs $1.4/M input tokens.
| Spec | GLM 5.2 | Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| Input price | $1.4/M tokens | $0.15/M tokens |
| Output price | $4.4/M tokens | $1.5/M tokens |
| Context window | 1.0M tokens | 66K tokens |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Free API (OpenRouter) | No | No |
| Released | Jun 2026 | Sep 2025 |
Our Verdict
GLM 5.2
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B ThinkingRunner-up
Not enough votes to call it. On the specs, GLM 5.2 has the edge: bigger model tier, newer, bigger context window, major provider backing.
Slight edge
Reviewing agent-written code?See a Brief PR report
API pricing
Cost per 1M tokens
GLM 5.2
Input
$1.40
Output
$4.40
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking
Input
$0.15
9.3× cheaper
Output
$1.50
2.9× cheaper
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking is cheaper on both: 9.3× input, 2.9× output.
Where to run it
26 hosts, cheapest first
GLM 5.224 hosts
Baidu Qianfanfp8$0.48 in$1.51 out1M99.9% upStreamLakefp8$0.48 in$1.51 out1M99.4% upDeepInfrafp4$0.49 in$1.56 out1M99.4% upAmbientfp8$0.60 in$2.00 out203k98.2% upNovitafp8$0.68 in$2.15 out1M99.9% upDigitalOcean$0.70 in$2.20 out262k99.3% up
18 more hostsFewer hosts
CoreWeavefp4$0.76 in$2.42 out1M99.8% upAtlasCloudfp8$0.94 in$2.95 out1M99.9% upAlibaba Cloudfp8$0.97 in$3.04 out1M99.9% upInceptronfp4$1.08 in$2.89 out1M99.2% upSiliconFlowfp8$1.19 in$3.74 out1M100% upPhalafp8$1.26 in$3.00 out1M99.6% upBasetenfp8$1.40 in$4.40 out1M100% upCloudflare Workers AI$1.40 in$4.40 out262k100% upCrusoefp8$1.40 in$4.40 out1M98.1% upFireworks$1.40 in$4.40 out1M100% upFriendli$1.40 in$4.40 out1M99.9% upGMI Cloudfp8$1.40 in$4.40 out1M99.8% upMistral$1.40 in$4.40 out1M100% upParasailfp4$1.40 in$4.40 out262k99.9% upTogether$1.40 in$4.40 out512k98.6% upVenicefp8$1.40 in$4.40 out1M99.6% upZ.aifp8$1.40 in$4.40 out1M99.9% upDecartfp4$2.10 in$6.60 out1M99.8% up
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking2 hosts
Per million tokens. Prices and uptime via OpenRouter, checked 13 Sep 2026.
Writing DNA
Style Comparison
Similarity
33%
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking uses 92.0x more emoji
GLM 5.2
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking
56%Vocabulary56%
18wSentence Length16w
0.27Hedging0.32
3.7Bold5.1
2.8Lists3.9
0.00Emoji0.92
0.56Headings0.75
0.24Transitions0.08
Based on 27 + 27 text responses
Research
What we learned reading every model
FAQ
Common questions
Keep exploring
More comparisons
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking vs MiniMax M3New provider
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking vs Ox AlphaNew provider
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking vs MiniMax M2.7New provider
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking vs Claude Opus 4.1New provider
GLM 5.2 vs Gemini 2.0 Flash ThinkingNew provider
GLM 5.2 vs Gemini 2.0 Pro ExperimentalNew provider
GLM 5.2 vs Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite Preview 06-17New provider
GLM 5.2 vs Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite Preview 09-2025New provider