Skip to content
Rival
How it worksPrivacyTerms
Explore all of Rival

Explore

  • Compare Models
  • All Models
  • Image Comparison
  • Audio Comparison
  • Image Generation
  • Best AI For...
  • Arena
  • API Pricing
  • Challenges

Discover

  • SubjectiveBench
  • Default Index
  • Research
  • Research downloads
  • Rival Kits
  • Find your AI taste
  • UI Glow-Up
  • VoiceLock
  • Cost Cutter
  • Agent skills
  • Benchmarks vs Vibes
  • Brief
  • Jailbreak
  • Model Updates
  • Provider Status
  • AI Creators

Connect

  • Methodology
  • Advertise
  • Partnerships
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms
  • RSS Feed
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Compare
  4. /
  5. GLM 5.3 FlashvsQwen3.5 35B A3B
Updated Aug 2026

GLM 5.3 FlashvsQwen3.5 35B A3B

GLM 5.3 Flash is cheaper than Qwen3.5 35B A3B at $0.15/M vs $0.25/M input tokens.

GLM 5.3 Flash and Qwen3.5 35B A3B compared across 15 shared prompts
SpecGLM 5.3 FlashQwen3.5 35B A3B
Input price$0.15/M tokens$0.25/M tokens
Output price$0.5/M tokens$2/M tokens
Context window1.3M tokens262K tokens
WeightsOpenOpen
Free API (OpenRouter)NoNo
ReleasedAug 2026Feb 2026
Side by side

Same prompt, both answers

Opening lines from 6 of the 15 prompts both answered. Formatting stripped, words untouched.

Ethical Dilemma with Stakeholders

You're the CEO of a pharmaceutical company. Your best-selling drug ($2B annual revenue, used by 4 million patients for chronic pain) has…

GLM 5.3 Flash1,321 words
48-Hour Action Plan: Liver Failure Signal in Flagship Drug Guiding Principle First The side effect is real, the drug is in 4 million patients, and roughly 500 patients per year may develop liver failure (4M ÷ 8,000). Every day of delay is measured in preventable liver transplants and deaths.
Read the full answer
Qwen3.5 35B A3B1,180 words
Executive Decision: The "Safety First" Protocol My Core Philosophy: In pharmaceuticals, trust is our only currency. If we lose patient trust or regulatory standing, the $2B revenue becomes irrelevant. Hiding this data is not a business strategy; it is a liability waiting to explode.
Read the full answer

Historical Counterfactual Analysis

If the transistor had been invented in 1920 instead of 1947, trace the likely technological, economic, and geopolitical implications through…

GLM 5.3 Flash1,314 words
Counterfactual: The Transistor in 1920 Preliminary Framing A 1920 transistor presumes vacuum-tube-era physics knowledge outpacing reality—quantum mechanics wasn't mature until 1926–28, so a working device would likely be an empirical oddity (like the actual point-contact transistor) imperfectly understood.
Read the full answer
Qwen3.5 35B A3B1,194 words
This alternate history scenario assumes that in 1920, the theoretical understanding of quantum mechanics and semiconductor physics advanced sufficiently to allow for the creation of a working point-contact transistor. This implies a "Great Leap Forward" in material science and physics during the interwar period.
Read the full answer

Beginner's Longevity Plan

Outline a simple, actionable 1-month plan for someone starting their journey towards better health and longevity. Focus on 3 key areas…

GLM 5.3 Flash327 words
1-Month Beginner Health & Longevity Plan 🥗 Area 1: Diet — "Add Before You Subtract" Week 1: Add one vegetable or fruit to every meal. Don't cut anything yet—just add. Week 2: Swap one sugary drink per day for water or unsweetened tea.
Read the full answer
Qwen3.5 35B A3B588 words
The 1-Month Longevity Kickstart Plan Core Philosophy: Consistency beats intensity. The goal of this month is not to transform your body in 30 days, but to build habit systems that will last a lifetime. The 3 Key Pillars Nutrition: Focus on nutrient density and hydration.
Read the full answer

Explain Like I'm a Specific Expert

Explain how a large language model (like GPT or Claude) learns and generates text to each of these three audiences: 1. **An experienced…

GLM 5.3 Flash1,276 words
The Experienced Software Engineer You know how a load balancer routes requests, how a cache stores frequently-accessed data, how a database index lets you find a needle without scanning the haystack? An LLM is a fundamentally different kind of system: it's a learned lookup, not a designed one.
Read the full answer
Qwen3.5 35B A3B695 words
For the Experienced Software Engineer You’re right to be skeptical of the "next token" description; it sounds trivial compared to the complexity of building a fault-tolerant distributed system. Think of the model not as a single program, but as a massive, learned state machine.
Read the full answer

Advanced Longevity Plan (Biohacker)

Develop a comprehensive, cutting-edge 3-month longevity plan for a biohacker aiming to optimize longevity, physical and cognitive…

GLM 5.3 Flash1,294 words
90-Day Longevity Optimization Protocol ⚠️ Medical disclaimer: This is an educational framework, not medical advice. Before starting, complete baseline labs and consult a physician—especially before fasting, supplements (rapamycin off-label use, high-dose anything), or if you have any health conditions.
Read the full answer
Qwen3.5 35B A3B1,171 words
Disclaimer: I am an AI, not a doctor. This plan involves significant physiological manipulation, including fasting, intense exercise, and potent supplementation. You must consult with a qualified healthcare provider, specifically one knowledgeable in functional or integrative medicine, before starting.
Read the full answer

Mini LBO Underwrite

You are underwriting a 5-year LBO for a private equity investment committee. Company (fictional): HarborTech Services (HTS) –…

GLM 5.3 Flash518 words
HarborTech Services — 5-Year LBO Summary Entry Math EV = 12.0x × $120m = $1,440.0m; Fees (2%) = $28.8m; Total uses = $1,468.8m Debt: TL = 4.0x × 120 = $480.0m; Mezz = 1.5x × 120 = $180.0m; Total = $660.0m (5.5x) Sponsor equity = $808.8m Base Case Projection ($m) FY26 FY27 FY28 FY29 FY30 Revenue 972.0 1,039.7 1,102.1…
Read the full answer
Qwen3.5 35B A3B579 words
LBO Underwriting: HarborTech Services (HTS) Financial Model Summary (FY2026–FY2030) Entry Assumptions (FY2025 Close): Revenue: $900m EBITDA: $120m Purchase Price: $1,440m ($120m × 12.0x) Debt: $660m (TL $480m / Mezz $180m) Equity Check: $780m (Purchase) + $28.8m (Fees) = $808.8m Debt Terms: Term Loan (TL): $480m @ 9%…
Read the full answer
Our Verdict
GLM 5.3 Flash
GLM 5.3 Flash
Qwen3.5 35B A3B
Qwen3.5 35B A3BRunner-up

Not enough votes to call it. On the specs, GLM 5.3 Flash has the edge: bigger model tier, newer, bigger context window, major provider backing.

GLM 5.3 Flash costs 4.0x less per token.

Slight edge
API pricing

Cost per 1M tokens

GLM 5.3 Flash
Input
$0.15
1.7× cheaper
Output
$0.50
4.0× cheaper
Qwen3.5 35B A3B
Input
$0.25
Output
$2.00

GLM 5.3 Flash is cheaper on both: 1.7× input, 4.0× output.

Where to run it

36 hosts, cheapest first

GLM 5.3 Flash29 hosts
HostInOutContextUptime
DDeepInfrafp4$0.07 in·$0.25 out·1M·99% upIInferenceNetfp4$0.09 in·$0.28 out·1M·97.8% upGGMI Cloudfp8$0.09 in·$0.30 out·1M·99.2% upWWafer$0.10 in·$0.35 out·1M·99.8% upRRelace$0.10 in·$0.36 out·1M·99.9% upOOpenInferencefp4$0.10 in·$0.50 out·1M·99.2% up
23 more hostsFewer hosts
PPhalafp8$0.13 in·$0.42 out·1M·99.6% upNNovitafp8$0.13 in·$0.44 out·1M·99.5% upSStreamLakefp8$0.14 in·$0.47 out·1M·99.1% upAAtlasCloudfp8$0.15 in·$0.50 out·1M·99.4% upBBasetenfp8$0.15 in·$0.50 out·1M·98.8% upCCoreWeavenvfp4$0.15 in·$0.50 out·1M·99.6% upDDigitalOcean$0.15 in·$0.50 out·1M·95.2% upFFireworks$0.15 in·$0.50 out·1M·99% upFFriendli$0.15 in·$0.50 out·1M·98.6% upIInceptronfp8$0.15 in·$0.50 out·1M·98.5% upIio.netfp8$0.15 in·$0.50 out·262k·99.1% upNNear AIfp8$0.15 in·$0.50 out·1M·99.1% upPParasailfp8$0.15 in·$0.50 out·1M·98.7% upRRekafp8$0.15 in·$0.50 out·262k·99% upSSiliconFlowfp8$0.15 in·$0.50 out·1M·99.7% upTTogether$0.15 in·$0.50 out·1M·99.6% upVVenice$0.15 in·$0.50 out·1M·99.1% upZ.aifp8$0.15 in·$0.50 out·1M·96.2% upNNextBitfp8$0.18 in·$0.60 out·1M·97.9% upModalfp8$0.45 in·$1.50 out·1M·99.6% upMMorphdegraded$0.08 in·$0.28 out·1M·95.9% upCCrusoefp4degraded$0.15 in·$0.50 out·1M·93% upCloudflare Workers AIdegraded$0.30 in·$1.00 out·1.3M·99.6% up
Qwen3.5 35B A3B7 hosts
HostInOutContextUptime
DDarkbloomfp4$0.08 in·$0.75 out·262k·99.9% upDDeepInfrafp8$0.14 in·$1.00 out·262k·100% upPParasailfp8$0.15 in·$1.00 out·262k·100% upAlibaba Cloud$0.16 in·$1.30 out·262k·99.9% upAAtlasCloudfp8$0.23 in·$1.80 out·262k·98% upSSiliconFlowfp8$0.24 in·$1.80 out·262k·27.5% up
1 more hostFewer hosts
VVenice$0.31 in·$1.25 out·256k·99.9% up

Per million tokens. Prices and uptime via OpenRouter, checked 23 Sep 2026.

Research

What we learned reading every model

FAQ

Common questions

GLM 5.3 Flash is developed by Zhipu AI while Qwen3.5 35B A3B is developed by Qwen. GLM 5.3 Flash has a 1.3M token context window vs Qwen3.5 35B A3B's 262K. You can compare their actual outputs across 15 challenges on Rival to see how they differ in practice.

It depends on your use case. GLM 5.3 Flash and Qwen3.5 35B A3B each have strengths in different areas. Rival lets you compare their real outputs side-by-side across 15 challenges so you can judge which fits your needs best.

GLM 5.3 Flash costs $0.15/M input tokens and Qwen3.5 35B A3B costs $0.25/M input tokens. GLM 5.3 Flash is $0.10/M cheaper per input. Check their side-by-side outputs on Rival to see if the price difference is justified by quality.

This page shows a side-by-side comparison of GLM 5.3 Flash and Qwen3.5 35B A3B across shared challenges. You can vote on which model produced the better output in a blind duel. Browsing and voting are free. No account is needed to look; signing in only saves your votes and likes.

Keep exploring

More comparisons

Against the newest arrivals

GLM 5.3 Flash logoDeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp logo
GLM 5.3 Flash vs DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision ExpLanded Sep 2026
Qwen3.5 35B A3B logoSolar Pro 4 logo
Qwen3.5 35B A3B vs Solar Pro 4Landed Sep 2026
GLM 5.3 Flash logoHy3 logo
GLM 5.3 Flash vs Hy3Landed Sep 2026
Qwen3.5 35B A3B logoQwen3.7 Flash logo
Qwen3.5 35B A3B vs Qwen3.7 FlashLanded Sep 2026
GLM 5.3 Flash logoLing 3.0 Flash logo
GLM 5.3 Flash vs Ling 3.0 FlashLanded Sep 2026
Qwen3.5 35B A3B logoMuse Glimmer 30B logo
Qwen3.5 35B A3B vs Muse Glimmer 30BLanded Sep 2026
GLM 5.3 Flash logoGLM 5.3 logo
GLM 5.3 Flash vs GLM 5.3Landed Sep 2026
Qwen3.5 35B A3B logoTernary Bonsai 2 27B logo
Qwen3.5 35B A3B vs Ternary Bonsai 2 27BLanded Sep 2026

Same lab, same size, long tail

GLM 5.3 Flash logoGLM 5.3 FlashX logo
GLM 5.3 Flash vs GLM 5.3 FlashXSame lab
GLM 5.3 Flash logoGLM 5.2 logo
GLM 5.3 Flash vs GLM 5.2Same lab
Qwen3.5 35B A3B logoQwen3.5 122B A10B logo
Qwen3.5 35B A3B vs Qwen3.5 122B A10BVersion compare
Qwen3.5 35B A3B logoQwen3.8 Flash logo
Qwen3.5 35B A3B vs Qwen3.8 FlashSame lab
GLM 5.3 Flash logoGPT-5.1 Codex Max logo
GLM 5.3 Flash vs GPT-5.1 Codex MaxNew provider
GLM 5.3 Flash logoGPT-5.1-Codex-Mini logo
GLM 5.3 Flash vs GPT-5.1-Codex-MiniNew provider
GLM 5.3 Flash logoGPT-5.2 logo
GLM 5.3 Flash vs GPT-5.2New provider
GLM 5.3 Flash logoGPT-5.2 Chat logo
GLM 5.3 Flash vs GPT-5.2 ChatSame size

Model pages

GLM 5.3 Flash logo
GLM 5.3 Flash15 outputs, specs and price
Qwen3.5 35B A3B logo
Qwen3.5 35B A3B53 outputs, specs and price
Rival
How it worksPrivacyTerms
Explore all of Rival

Explore

  • Compare Models
  • All Models
  • Image Comparison
  • Audio Comparison
  • Image Generation
  • Best AI For...
  • Arena
  • API Pricing
  • Challenges

Discover

  • SubjectiveBench
  • Default Index
  • Research
  • Research downloads
  • Rival Kits
  • Find your AI taste
  • UI Glow-Up
  • VoiceLock
  • Cost Cutter
  • Agent skills
  • Benchmarks vs Vibes
  • Brief
  • Jailbreak
  • Model Updates
  • Provider Status
  • AI Creators

Connect

  • Methodology
  • Advertise
  • Partnerships
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms
  • RSS Feed