DeepSeek V4 Flash vs GLM-5
DeepSeek V4 Flash (2026) and GLM-5 (2026) are frontier-tier reasoning models from DeepSeek and Zhipu AI. DeepSeek V4 Flash ships a 1m-token context window, while GLM-5 ships a 200k-token context window. On MMLU PRO, DeepSeek V4 Flash leads by 0.2 pts. On pricing, DeepSeek V4 Flash costs $0.10/1M input tokens versus $0.60/1M for the alternative. This comparison covers specs, pricing, API access, capabilities, benchmarks, input and output token costs, and production fit for coding and agent workloads.
DeepSeek V4 Flash is ~510% cheaper at $0.10/1M; pay for GLM-5 only for provider fit.
Decision scorecard
Local evidence first| Signal | DeepSeek V4 Flash | GLM-5 |
|---|---|---|
| Best for | reasoning-heavy apps, tool-calling agents, and long-context analysis | reasoning-heavy apps, tool-calling agents, and provider-routed production |
| Decision fit | Coding, RAG, and Agents | Coding, RAG, and Agents |
| Context window | 1m | 200k |
| Cheapest output | $0.20/1M tokens | $2.08/1M tokens |
| Provider routes | 5 tracked | 7 tracked |
| Shared benchmarks | MMLU PRO leader | 5 rows |
Decision tradeoffs
- DeepSeek V4 Flash holds a shared-benchmark lead on MMLU PRO, ahead by 0.2 points.
- DeepSeek V4 Flash has the larger context window for long prompts, retrieval packs, or transcript analysis.
- DeepSeek V4 Flash has the lower cheapest tracked output price at $0.20/1M tokens.
- Local decision data tags DeepSeek V4 Flash for Coding, RAG, and Agents.
- GLM-5 holds a shared-benchmark lead on SWE-bench Pro, ahead by 2.5 points.
- GLM-5 has broader tracked provider coverage for fallback and procurement flexibility.
- Local decision data tags GLM-5 for Coding, RAG, and Agents.
Monthly cost at traffic
Estimate token spend from the cheapest tracked input and output route or tier on this page.
DeepSeek V4 Flash
$128
Cheapest tracked route/tier: OpenRouter
GLM-5
$1,000
Cheapest tracked route/tier: OpenRouter
Estimated monthly gap: $872. Batch, cache, alternate speed tiers, and negotiated pricing are excluded from this local estimate.
Switch friction
- Provider overlap exists on OpenRouter, Vercel AI Gateway, and Novita AI; start route-level A/B tests there.
- GLM-5 is $1.88/1M tokens higher on cheapest tracked output pricing, so quality gains need to justify the spend.
- Provider overlap exists on OpenRouter, Vercel AI Gateway, and Novita AI; start route-level A/B tests there.
- DeepSeek V4 Flash is $1.88/1M tokens lower on cheapest tracked output pricing before cache, batch, or negotiated discounts.
Specs
Pricing and availability
| Pricing attribute | DeepSeek V4 Flash | GLM-5 |
|---|---|---|
| Input price | $0.10/1M tokens | $0.60/1M tokens |
| Output price | $0.20/1M tokens | $2.08/1M tokens |
| Providers |
Capabilities
| Capability | DeepSeek V4 Flash | GLM-5 |
|---|---|---|
| Vision | No | No |
| Multimodal | No | No |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yes |
| Function calling | Yes | Yes |
| Tool use | Yes | Yes |
| Structured outputs | Yes | Yes |
| Code execution | No | No |
| IDE integration | No | No |
| Computer use | No | No |
| Parallel agents | No | No |
Benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Flash | GLM-5 |
|---|---|---|
| MMLU PRO | 86.2 | 86.0 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 79.0 | 77.8 |
| SWE-bench Pro | 52.6 | 55.1 |
| Google-Proof Q&A | 88.1 | 86.0 |
| LiveCodeBench | 91.6 | 81.9 |
Deep dive
On shared benchmark coverage, MMLU PRO has DeepSeek V4 Flash at 86.2 and GLM-5 at 86, with DeepSeek V4 Flash ahead by 0.2 points; SWE-bench Verified has DeepSeek V4 Flash at 79 and GLM-5 at 77.8, with DeepSeek V4 Flash ahead by 1.2 points; SWE-bench Pro has DeepSeek V4 Flash at 52.6 and GLM-5 at 55.1, with GLM-5 ahead by 2.5 points. The largest visible gap is 2.5 points on SWE-bench Pro, which matters most when that benchmark mirrors your workload. Treat isolated benchmark wins as directional, because provider routing, prompt style, and tool access can move real application results.
The capability footprint is close: both models cover reasoning mode, function calling, tool use, and structured outputs. That makes context budget, benchmark fit, and provider maturity more important than a simple checklist. If your application depends on one integration detail, verify it against the provider route you plan to use, not just the base model listing.
For cost, DeepSeek V4 Flash lists $0.10/1M input and $0.20/1M output tokens on the cheapest tracked provider, while GLM-5 lists $0.60/1M input and $2.08/1M output tokens on the cheapest tracked provider. A 70/30 input-output blend puts DeepSeek V4 Flash lower by about $0.92 per million blended tokens. Availability is 5 providers versus 7, so concentration risk also matters.
Choose DeepSeek V4 Flash when long-context analysis, larger context windows, and lower input-token cost are central to the workload. Choose GLM-5 when provider fit and broader provider choice are more important. For production, rerun your own prompts through the exact provider, region, and tool stack you plan to ship.
FAQ
Which has a larger context window, DeepSeek V4 Flash or GLM-5?
DeepSeek V4 Flash supports 1m tokens, while GLM-5 supports 200k tokens. That gap matters most for long documents, large codebases, retrieval-heavy agents, and conversations where earlier context must remain visible.
Which is cheaper, DeepSeek V4 Flash or GLM-5?
DeepSeek V4 Flash is cheaper on tracked token pricing. DeepSeek V4 Flash costs $0.10/1M input and $0.20/1M output tokens. GLM-5 costs $0.60/1M input and $2.08/1M output tokens. Provider discounts or batch pricing can still change the final bill.
Is DeepSeek V4 Flash or GLM-5 open source?
DeepSeek V4 Flash is listed under MIT. GLM-5 is listed under MIT. License labels affect whether you can self-host, redistribute weights, or rely only on hosted APIs, so confirm the upstream license before deployment.
Which is better for reasoning mode, DeepSeek V4 Flash or GLM-5?
Both DeepSeek V4 Flash and GLM-5 expose reasoning mode. The better choice depends on benchmark fit, context budget, pricing, and whether your provider route exposes the same capability surface. Use this as a quick comparison signal, then confirm the provider-specific limits before committing to production.
Which is better for function calling, DeepSeek V4 Flash or GLM-5?
Both DeepSeek V4 Flash and GLM-5 expose function calling. The better choice depends on benchmark fit, context budget, pricing, and whether your provider route exposes the same capability surface. Use this as a quick comparison signal, then confirm the provider-specific limits before committing to production.
Where can I run DeepSeek V4 Flash and GLM-5?
DeepSeek V4 Flash is available on DeepSeek Platform, OpenRouter, Microsoft Foundry, Vercel AI Gateway, and Novita AI. GLM-5 is available on Fireworks AI, OpenRouter, Together AI, GCP Vertex AI, and NVIDIA NIM. Provider coverage can affect latency, region availability, compliance posture, and fallback options.
Continue comparing
Last reviewed: 2026-06-01. Data sourced from public model cards and provider documentation.