GLM-5 vs Llama 3.2 90B Instruct
GLM-5 (2026) and Llama 3.2 90B Instruct (2025) are frontier reasoning models from Zhipu AI and AI at Meta. GLM-5 ships a 200k-token context window, while Llama 3.2 90B Instruct ships a 128k-token context window. On pricing, GLM-5 costs $0.60/1M input tokens versus $1.35/1M 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.
GLM-5 is ~125% cheaper at $0.60/1M; pay for Llama 3.2 90B Instruct only for vision-heavy evaluation.
Decision scorecard
Local evidence first| Signal | GLM-5 | Llama 3.2 90B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Best for | reasoning-heavy apps, tool-calling agents, and provider-routed production | multimodal apps |
| Decision fit | Coding, RAG, and Agents | RAG, Long context, and Vision |
| Context window | 200k | 128k |
| Cheapest output | $2.08/1M tokens | $1.80/1M tokens |
| Provider routes | 7 tracked | 1 tracked |
| Shared benchmarks | 0 rows | 0 rows |
Decision tradeoffs
- GLM-5 has the larger context window for long prompts, retrieval packs, or transcript analysis.
- GLM-5 has broader tracked provider coverage for fallback and procurement flexibility.
- GLM-5 uniquely exposes Reasoning, Function calling, and Tool use in local model data.
- Local decision data tags GLM-5 for Coding, RAG, and Agents.
- Llama 3.2 90B Instruct has the lower cheapest tracked output price at $1.80/1M tokens.
- Llama 3.2 90B Instruct uniquely exposes Vision and Multimodal in local model data.
- Local decision data tags Llama 3.2 90B Instruct for RAG, Long context, and Vision.
Monthly cost at traffic
Estimate token spend from the cheapest tracked input and output route or tier on this page.
GLM-5
$1,000
Cheapest tracked route/tier: OpenRouter
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct
$1,530
Cheapest tracked route/tier: AWS Bedrock
Estimated monthly gap: $530. Batch, cache, alternate speed tiers, and negotiated pricing are excluded from this local estimate.
Switch friction
- No overlapping tracked provider route is sourced for GLM-5 and Llama 3.2 90B Instruct; plan for SDK, billing, or endpoint changes.
- Llama 3.2 90B Instruct is $0.28/1M tokens lower on cheapest tracked output pricing before cache, batch, or negotiated discounts.
- Check replacement coverage for Reasoning, Function calling, and Tool use before moving production traffic.
- Llama 3.2 90B Instruct adds Vision and Multimodal in local capability data.
- No overlapping tracked provider route is sourced for Llama 3.2 90B Instruct and GLM-5; plan for SDK, billing, or endpoint changes.
- GLM-5 is $0.28/1M tokens higher on cheapest tracked output pricing, so quality gains need to justify the spend.
- Check replacement coverage for Vision and Multimodal before moving production traffic.
- GLM-5 adds Reasoning, Function calling, and Tool use in local capability data.
Specs
| Specification | ||
|---|---|---|
| Released | 2026-02-11 | 2025-09-01 |
| Context window | 200k | 128k |
| Parameters | 744B total, 40B active | 90B |
| Architecture | mixture of experts | - |
| License | MIT(OSI) | Llama 3 Community |
| Openness | Open source | Open weights |
| Commercial use | Commercial use allowed | Commercial use with conditions |
| Knowledge cutoff | 2025-11 | 2023-12 |
Pricing and availability
| Pricing attribute | GLM-5 | Llama 3.2 90B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Input price | $0.60/1M tokens | $1.35/1M tokens |
| Output price | $2.08/1M tokens | $1.80/1M tokens |
| Providers |
Capabilities
| Capability | GLM-5 | Llama 3.2 90B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Vision | No | Yes |
| Multimodal | No | Yes |
| Reasoning | Yes | No |
| Function calling | Yes | No |
| Tool use | Yes | No |
| Structured outputs | Yes | Yes |
| Code execution | No | 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: Llama 3.2 90B Instruct, multimodal input: Llama 3.2 90B Instruct, reasoning mode: GLM-5, function calling: GLM-5, and tool use: GLM-5. Both models share 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 lists $0.60/1M input and $2.08/1M output tokens on the cheapest tracked provider, while Llama 3.2 90B Instruct lists $1.35/1M input and $1.80/1M output tokens on the cheapest tracked provider. A 70/30 input-output blend puts GLM-5 lower by about $0.44 per million blended tokens. Availability is 7 providers versus 1, so concentration risk also matters.
Choose GLM-5 when reasoning depth, larger context windows, and lower input-token cost are central to the workload. Choose Llama 3.2 90B Instruct 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. This keeps the decision grounded in measurable tradeoffs instead of brand-level assumptions. It also helps separate model capability from provider packaging, which can change cost and latency.
FAQ
Which has a larger context window, GLM-5 or Llama 3.2 90B Instruct?
GLM-5 supports 200k tokens, while Llama 3.2 90B Instruct supports 128k tokens. That gap matters most for long documents, large codebases, retrieval-heavy agents, and conversations where earlier context must remain visible.
Which is cheaper, GLM-5 or Llama 3.2 90B Instruct?
GLM-5 is cheaper on tracked token pricing. GLM-5 costs $0.60/1M input and $2.08/1M output tokens. Llama 3.2 90B Instruct costs $1.35/1M input and $1.80/1M output tokens. Provider discounts or batch pricing can still change the final bill.
Is GLM-5 or Llama 3.2 90B Instruct open source?
GLM-5 is listed under MIT. Llama 3.2 90B Instruct is listed under Llama 3 Community. 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 or Llama 3.2 90B Instruct?
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct 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.
Which is better for multimodal input, GLM-5 or Llama 3.2 90B Instruct?
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct 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 and Llama 3.2 90B Instruct?
GLM-5 is available on Fireworks AI, OpenRouter, Together AI, GCP Vertex AI, and NVIDIA NIM. Llama 3.2 90B Instruct is available on AWS Bedrock. Provider coverage can affect latency, region availability, compliance posture, and fallback options.
Continue comparing
Last reviewed: 2026-06-04. Data sourced from public model cards and provider documentation.