GLM-5.1 vs Qwen3-Max
GLM-5.1 (2026) and Qwen3-Max (2025) are frontier reasoning models from Zhipu AI and Alibaba. GLM-5.1 ships a 200k-token context window, while Qwen3-Max ships a 262k-token context window. On pricing, GLM-5.1 costs $0.98/1M input tokens; Qwen3-Max ranges from $1.20 to $3/1M input tokens by tier. This comparison covers specs, pricing, API access, capabilities, benchmarks, input and output token costs, and production fit for coding and agent workloads.
GLM-5.1 is safer overall; choose Qwen3-Max when long-context analysis matters.
Decision scorecard
Local evidence first| Signal | GLM-5.1 | Qwen3-Max |
|---|---|---|
| Best for | reasoning-heavy apps, tool-calling agents, and provider-routed production | multimodal apps, tool-calling agents, and provider-routed production |
| Decision fit | Coding, RAG, and Agents | Coding, RAG, and Agents |
| Context window | 200k | 262k |
| Cheapest output | $3.08/1M tokens | $3.90/1M tokens |
| Provider routes | 5 tracked | 3 tracked |
| Shared benchmarks | 0 rows | 0 rows |
Decision tradeoffs
- GLM-5.1 has the lower cheapest tracked output price at $3.08/1M tokens.
- GLM-5.1 has broader tracked provider coverage for fallback and procurement flexibility.
- GLM-5.1 uniquely exposes Reasoning and Code execution in local model data.
- Local decision data tags GLM-5.1 for Coding, RAG, and Agents.
- Qwen3-Max has the larger context window for long prompts, retrieval packs, or transcript analysis.
- Qwen3-Max uniquely exposes Vision and Multimodal in local model data.
- Local decision data tags Qwen3-Max 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.
GLM-5.1
$1,554
Cheapest tracked route/tier: Z.ai
Qwen3-Max
$1,599
Cheapest tracked route/tier: OpenRouter
Estimated monthly gap: $45.00. 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.
- Qwen3-Max is $0.82/1M tokens higher on cheapest tracked output pricing, so quality gains need to justify the spend.
- Check replacement coverage for Reasoning and Code execution before moving production traffic.
- Qwen3-Max adds Vision and Multimodal in local capability data.
- Provider overlap exists on OpenRouter, Vercel AI Gateway, and Novita AI; start route-level A/B tests there.
- GLM-5.1 is $0.82/1M tokens lower on cheapest tracked output pricing before cache, batch, or negotiated discounts.
- Check replacement coverage for Vision and Multimodal before moving production traffic.
- GLM-5.1 adds Reasoning and Code execution in local capability data.
Specs
| Specification | ||
|---|---|---|
| Released | 2026-04-07 | 2025-04-28 |
| Context window | 200k | 262k |
| Parameters | 754B total, 40B active | — |
| Architecture | mixture of experts | decoder only |
| License | MIT(OSI) | Apache 2.0(OSI) |
| Openness | Open source | Open source |
| Commercial use | Commercial use allowed | Commercial use allowed |
| Knowledge cutoff | 2025-11 | 2025-12 |
Pricing and availability
| Pricing attribute | GLM-5.1 | Qwen3-Max |
|---|---|---|
| Input price | $0.98/1M tokens |
|
| Output price | $3.08/1M tokens |
|
| Providers |
Capabilities
| Capability | GLM-5.1 | Qwen3-Max |
|---|---|---|
| Vision | No | Yes |
| Multimodal | No | Yes |
| Reasoning | Yes | No |
| Function calling | Yes | Yes |
| Tool use | Yes | Yes |
| Structured outputs | Yes | Yes |
| Code execution | Yes | No |
| IDE integration | No | No |
| Computer use | No | No |
| Parallel agents | No | No |
Benchmarks
No shared benchmark rows are currently sourced for this pair.
Deep dive
The capability footprint differs most on vision: Qwen3-Max, multimodal input: Qwen3-Max, reasoning mode: GLM-5.1, and code execution: GLM-5.1. Both models share function calling, tool use, and structured outputs, so the practical split is not just feature count. Use those differences to decide whether the page is about raw model quality, agentic coding support, multimodal ingestion, or predictable structured API behavior.
For cost, GLM-5.1 lists $0.98/1M input and $3.08/1M output tokens on the cheapest tracked provider, while Qwen3-Max lists tiered pricing: 0-32,001t is $1.20/1M input and $6/1M output; 0-128,001t is $2.40/1M input and $12/1M output; 128,001t+ is $3/1M input and $15/1M output. A 70/30 input-output blend puts GLM-5.1 lower by about $0.11 per million blended tokens. For tiered rows, this cheapest-track view can understate interactive or fast-lane spend, so compare the tier you will actually use. Availability is 5 providers versus 3, so concentration risk also matters.
Choose GLM-5.1 when coding workflow support and broader provider choice are central to the workload. Choose Qwen3-Max when long-context analysis, larger context windows, and lower cheapest-tier input-token cost 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, GLM-5.1 or Qwen3-Max?
Qwen3-Max supports 262k tokens, while GLM-5.1 supports 200k tokens. That gap matters most for long documents, large codebases, retrieval-heavy agents, and conversations where earlier context must remain visible. Use this as a quick comparison signal, then confirm the provider-specific limits before committing to production.
Which is cheaper, GLM-5.1 or Qwen3-Max?
GLM-5.1 lists $0.98/1M input and $3.08/1M output tokens on the cheapest tracked provider. Qwen3-Max lists tiered pricing: 0-32,001t is $1.20/1M input and $6/1M output; 0-128,001t is $2.40/1M input and $12/1M output; 128,001t+ is $3/1M input and $15/1M output. Compare the tier you will actually use; cheap async pricing can overstate savings for interactive workflows. Provider discounts or batch pricing can still change the final bill.
Is GLM-5.1 or Qwen3-Max open source?
GLM-5.1 is listed under MIT. Qwen3-Max is listed under Apache 2.0. 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 vision, GLM-5.1 or Qwen3-Max?
Qwen3-Max has the clearer documented vision signal in this comparison. If vision is mission-critical, validate it against the provider endpoint because model-level support and API-level exposure can differ. Use this as a quick comparison signal, then confirm the provider-specific limits before committing to production.
Which is better for multimodal input, GLM-5.1 or Qwen3-Max?
Qwen3-Max has the clearer documented multimodal input signal in this comparison. If multimodal input is mission-critical, validate it against the provider endpoint because model-level support and API-level exposure can differ.
Where can I run GLM-5.1 and Qwen3-Max?
GLM-5.1 is available on Z.ai, OpenRouter, Fireworks AI, Vercel AI Gateway, and Novita AI. Qwen3-Max is available on OpenRouter, Vercel AI Gateway, and Novita AI. Provider coverage can affect latency, region availability, compliance posture, and fallback options.
Continue comparing
Last reviewed: 2026-05-25. Data sourced from public model cards and provider documentation.