Qwen3.5-Flash is $0.04 cheaper per 1M input tokens (35% lower; 1.54x difference).
API cost decision in 10 seconds
Qwen3.5-Flash vs GLM 4 32B
Pick GLM 4 32B for lower cost; pick Qwen3.5-Flash only if the larger context window matters more.
Page updated:
Data confirmed:
Prices normalized to USD per 1M tokens
Sample workload: 1M input + 500K output
Budget verdict
Pick GLM 4 32B for lower cost; pick Qwen3.5-Flash only if the larger context window matters more.
On the standard 1M input plus 500K output workload, GLM 4 32B is estimated at $0.15 vs $0.2 for Qwen3.5-Flash, saving $0.04 (23.1% lower).
Cost-first pickGLM 4 32B
Context-first pickQwen3.5-Flash
Sample savings$0.0423.1%
10x traffic gap$0.45
Qwen3.5-Flash has more context, but GLM 4 32B saves $0.04 on the standard workload. At 10x that traffic, the same price gap is about $0.45. Use the calculator below to replace the sample workload with your own token volume.
Cost sensitivity
Workload Sensitivity
Cost winner changes by workload shape: input-heavy / RAG favors Qwen3.5-Flash, balanced workload favors GLM 4 32B, and output-heavy chatbot favors GLM 4 32B.
| Workload shape | Token mix | Better pick | Qwen3.5-Flash | GLM 4 32B |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Input-heavy / RAG | 5M input + 500K output | Qwen3.5-Flash | $0.46 | $0.55 |
| Balanced workload | 1M input + 1M output | GLM 4 32B | $0.33 | $0.2 |
| Output-heavy chatbot | 1M input + 5M output | GLM 4 32B | $1.36 | $0.6 |
GLM 4 32B is $0.16 cheaper per 1M output tokens (61.5% lower; 2.6x difference).
Qwen3.5-Flash has 872K more context (7.81x larger).
GLM 4 32B is $0.04 cheaper on the standard workload (23.1% lower).
Estimate your workload cost
Your Workload Cost
This estimate uses normalized public API pricing per 1M tokens. It is a planning aid, not a billing quote. Verify provider pricing, limits, and terms before production use.
Quick Decision
Qwen3.5-Flash has the lower input price; GLM 4 32B has the lower output price; Qwen3.5-Flash offers the larger context window. For the 1M input plus 500K output sample, GLM 4 32B is cheaper for the standard workload.
For a 1M input token plus 500K output token workload, the estimated API cost is $0.2 for Qwen3.5-Flash and $0.15 for GLM 4 32B.
Choose Qwen3.5-Flash when you care most about lower input-token price, and larger context window.
Choose GLM 4 32B when you care most about lower output-token price.
- On the standard 1M input plus 500K output workload, GLM 4 32B is estimated at $0.15 vs $0.2 for Qwen3.5-Flash, saving $0.04 (23.1% lower).
- GLM 4 32B is $0.04 cheaper on the standard workload (23.1% lower).
- Qwen3.5-Flash is $0.04 cheaper per 1M input tokens (35% lower; 1.54x difference).
- GLM 4 32B is $0.16 cheaper per 1M output tokens (61.5% lower; 2.6x difference).
- Qwen3.5-Flash has 872K more context (7.81x larger).
| Feature | Qwen3.5-Flash (Qwen) | GLM 4 32B (Z.ai) |
|---|---|---|
| Input Price prompt tokens per 1M | $0.065 | $0.1 |
| Completion Price per 1M tokens | $0.26 | $0.1 |
| Sample Workload Cost 1M input + 500K output | $0.2 | $0.15 |
| Context Window | 1M | 128K |
| Release Date | ||
| Popularity | #25 | #147 |
Use-Case Decision Matrix
| Use case | Better pick | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Budget-constrained production | GLM 4 32B | On the standard 1M input plus 500K output workload, GLM 4 32B is estimated at $0.15 vs $0.2 for Qwen3.5-Flash, saving $0.04 (23.1% lower). |
| High-volume input processing | Qwen3.5-Flash | Lower prompt-token price matters most when prompts, retrieved passages, or documents dominate the bill. |
| Long responses and chatbots | GLM 4 32B | Lower output-token price matters most when assistants generate many completion tokens. |
| RAG or long-document work | Qwen3.5-Flash | A larger context window leaves more room for retrieved passages, conversation history, or source files. |
Related Alternatives
- Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct (free) can replace Qwen3.5-Flash when lower sample workload cost matters most: $0.
- Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B (free) can replace Qwen3.5-Flash when lower sample workload cost matters most: $0.
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct can replace Qwen3.5-Flash when lower sample workload cost matters most: $0.09.
- Qwen3.5-9B can replace Qwen3.5-Flash when lower sample workload cost matters most: $0.11.
- Llama 4 Scout offers 10M context with $0.23 sample workload cost.
- Owl Alpha offers 1.05M context with $0 sample workload cost.
- DeepSeek V4 Flash offers 1.05M context with $0.2 sample workload cost.
- DeepSeek V4 Flash (free) offers 1.05M context with $0 sample workload cost.
- DeepSeek V4 Flash · DeepSeek · #1
- Hy3 preview · Tencent · #2
- Claude Opus 4.7 · Anthropic · #3
- Claude Sonnet 4.6 · Anthropic · #4
Cheaper alternatives
Review low-cost models sorted by a standard 1M input plus 500K output workload.
Open cheapest modelsLarger context alternatives
Find models with larger context windows for RAG, long documents, and codebase review.
Open largest context modelsProvider catalogs
Compare models within provider hubs before choosing a final API vendor.
Open provider hubsQwen catalog
Review all tracked Qwen models before deciding whether this matchup is the right shortlist.
Open Qwen modelsZ.ai catalog
Check other Z.ai models with comparable pricing, context, or release timing.
Open Z.ai modelsThe Qwen3.5 native vision-language Flash models are built on a hybrid architecture that integrates a linear attention mechanism with a sparse mixture-of-experts model, achieving higher inference efficiency. Compared to the...
GLM 4 32B is a cost-effective foundation language model. It can efficiently perform complex tasks and has significantly enhanced capabilities in tool use, online search, and code-related intelligent tasks. It...