GLM-5.2 vs Qwen3.5-4B
GLM-5.2 (2026) and Qwen3.5-4B (2026) are frontier reasoning models from Zhipu AI and Alibaba. GLM-5.2 ships a 1m-token context window, while Qwen3.5-4B ships a 262k-token context window. On Google-Proof Q&A, GLM-5.2 leads by 15 pts. This comparison covers specs, pricing, API access, capabilities, benchmarks, input and output token costs, and production fit for coding and agent workloads. It focuses on practical selection signals rather than broad model-family marketing.
GLM-5.2 is safer overall; choose Qwen3.5-4B when vision-heavy evaluation matters.
Decision scorecard
Local evidence first| Signal | GLM-5.2 | Qwen3.5-4B |
|---|---|---|
| Best for | reasoning-heavy apps, tool-calling agents, and long-context analysis | multimodal apps |
| Decision fit | Coding, RAG, and Agents | Coding, Agents, and Long context |
| Context window | 1m | 262k |
| Cheapest output | $4.40/1M tokens | - |
| Provider routes | 1 tracked | 0 tracked |
| Shared benchmarks | Google-Proof Q&A leader | 1 shared |
Decision tradeoffs
- GLM-5.2 holds a shared-benchmark lead on Google-Proof Q&A, ahead by 15 points.
- GLM-5.2 has the larger context window for long prompts, retrieval packs, or transcript analysis.
- GLM-5.2 has broader tracked provider coverage for fallback and procurement flexibility.
- GLM-5.2 uniquely exposes Reasoning, Function calling, and Tool use in local model data.
- Local decision data tags GLM-5.2 for Coding, RAG, and Agents.
- Qwen3.5-4B uniquely exposes Vision and Multimodal in local model data.
- Local decision data tags Qwen3.5-4B for Coding, Agents, and Long context.
Monthly cost at traffic
Estimate token spend from the cheapest tracked input and output route or tier on this page.
GLM-5.2
$2,220
Cheapest tracked route/tier: OpenRouter
Qwen3.5-4B
Unavailable
No complete token price in local provider data
Cost delta unavailable until both models have sourced input and output token prices.
Switch friction
- No overlapping tracked provider route is sourced for GLM-5.2 and Qwen3.5-4B; plan for SDK, billing, or endpoint changes.
- Check replacement coverage for Reasoning, Function calling, and Tool use before moving production traffic.
- Qwen3.5-4B adds Vision and Multimodal in local capability data.
- No overlapping tracked provider route is sourced for Qwen3.5-4B and GLM-5.2; plan for SDK, billing, or endpoint changes.
- Check replacement coverage for Vision and Multimodal before moving production traffic.
- GLM-5.2 adds Reasoning, Function calling, and Tool use in local capability data.
Specs
| Specification | ||
|---|---|---|
| Released | 2026-06-13 | 2026-03-02 |
| Context window | 1m | 262k |
| Parameters | 753B total, 40B active | 4B |
| Architecture | Mixture of Experts | - |
| License | MITOSI-approved | Apache 2.0OSI-approved |
| Openness | Open source | Open source |
| Commercial use | License generally permits commercial use — review terms | License generally permits commercial use — review terms |
| Knowledge cutoff | - | - |
Pricing and availability
| Pricing attribute | GLM-5.2 | Qwen3.5-4B |
|---|---|---|
| Input price | $1.40/1M tokens | - |
| Output price | $4.40/1M tokens | - |
| Providers | - |
Capabilities
| Capability | GLM-5.2 | Qwen3.5-4B |
|---|---|---|
| Vision | No | Yes |
| Multimodal | No | Yes |
| Reasoning | Yes | No |
| Function calling | Yes | No |
| Tool use | Yes | No |
| Structured outputs | Yes | No |
| Code execution | Yes | No |
| IDE integration | No | No |
| Computer use | No | No |
| Parallel agents | No | No |
Benchmarks
| Benchmark | GLM-5.2 | Qwen3.5-4B |
|---|---|---|
| Google-Proof Q&A | 91.2 | 76.2 |
Deep dive
On shared benchmark coverage, Google-Proof Q&A has GLM-5.2 at 91.2 and Qwen3.5-4B at 76.2, with GLM-5.2 ahead by 15 points. The largest visible gap is 15 points on Google-Proof Q&A, 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 differs most on vision: Qwen3.5-4B, multimodal input: Qwen3.5-4B, reasoning mode: GLM-5.2, function calling: GLM-5.2, tool use: GLM-5.2, structured outputs: GLM-5.2, and code execution: GLM-5.2. Both models share the core language-model surface, 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.
Pricing coverage is uneven: GLM-5.2 has $1.40/1M input tokens and Qwen3.5-4B has no token price sourced yet. Provider availability is 1 tracked routes versus 0. Treat unknown pricing as an integration gap, then verify the route you will actually call before estimating production spend.
Choose GLM-5.2 when coding workflow support, larger context windows, and broader provider choice are central to the workload. Choose Qwen3.5-4B when vision-heavy evaluation 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-5.2 or Qwen3.5-4B?
GLM-5.2 supports 1m tokens, while Qwen3.5-4B supports 262k 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.
Is GLM-5.2 or Qwen3.5-4B open source?
GLM-5.2 is listed under MIT. Qwen3.5-4B 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-5.2 or Qwen3.5-4B?
Qwen3.5-4B 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-5.2 or Qwen3.5-4B?
Qwen3.5-4B 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.
Which is better for reasoning mode, GLM-5.2 or Qwen3.5-4B?
GLM-5.2 has the clearer documented reasoning mode signal in this comparison. If reasoning mode is mission-critical, validate it against the provider endpoint because model-level support and API-level exposure can differ.
Where can I run GLM-5.2 and Qwen3.5-4B?
GLM-5.2 is available on OpenRouter. Qwen3.5-4B is available on the tracked providers still being sourced. Provider coverage can affect latency, region availability, compliance posture, and fallback options. Use this as a quick comparison signal, then confirm the provider-specific limits before committing to production.
Continue comparing
Last reviewed: 2026-06-16. Data sourced from public model cards and provider documentation.