GLM-5.2 vs Qwen3.8 Flash: Specs & Benchmark Comparison
| Characteristic | GLM-5.2 | Qwen3.8 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Company | Zhipu AI | Alibaba |
| Release Date | June 16, 2026 | August 26, 2026 |
| Parameters | 753B | 125B |
| Multimodal | No | Yes |
| Context (input) | 1.0M | 1.0M |
| Context (output) | 131K | 131K |
| Input Price / 1M | $1.40 | $0.15 |
| Output Price / 1M | $4.40 | $0.47 |
| Average Score | 0.9 | 0.7 |
| Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 0.9 | 0.9 |
Visual Benchmark Comparison
GLM-5.2
Qwen3.8 Flash
GPQA0.9 vs 0.9
0.9
0.9
Verdict
Qwen3.8 Flash leads in 2 out of 4 comparison categories.
Overall Performance
Both models show comparable average scores: GLM-5.2 — 0.9, Qwen3.8 Flash — 0.7.
API Cost
Qwen3.8 Flash is 9.4x cheaper: input $0.15/1M vs $1.40/1M tokens.
Context Window
Same context size: 1M tokens.
Recency
Qwen3.8 Flash is newer: released 8/26/2026 vs 6/16/2026.
More About These Models
Related Comparisons
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is better for coding — GLM-5.2 or Qwen3.8 Flash?
Direct comparison on the SWE-Bench benchmark is not available. We recommend reviewing other metrics on the comparison page.
Which model is cheaper — GLM-5.2 or Qwen3.8 Flash?
Qwen3.8 Flash is cheaper for input: $0.15 per 1M tokens vs $1.40.
Which has a larger context window — GLM-5.2 or Qwen3.8 Flash?
GLM-5.2 supports a larger context: 1,048,576 tokens vs 1,048,576.
The GLM-5.2 and Qwen3.8 Flash comparison is updated for 2026. Data includes benchmark results, API pricing, context window size and other specifications. For more detailed information, visit the GLM-5.2 or Qwen3.8 Flash page. See also the complete list of AI model comparisons.