Model Comparison
GLM-4.7-Flash (Reasoning)
vs. Qwen2.5 Turbo
Comparing 2 AI models · 11 benchmarks · Z AI, Alibaba
Recommended Pick
Z GLM-4.7-Flash (Reasoning) 6 metric wins Strongest on: TTFT, Reasoning, Intelligence
Best Value
Qwen2.5 Turbo
100.0 value score
28.8 reasoning / $0.09/1M
Lowest Price
Qwen2.5 Turbo
$0.05/1M input price
Best Reasoning
GLM-4.7-Flash (Reasoning)
29.4 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
GLM-4.7-Flash (Reasoning)
25.9 coding index
Composite Indices
Higher is better; speed and price are normalized
Standard Benchmarks
Only benchmarks with data are shown
Differences That Matter
Best value
Qwen2.5 Turbo has the strongest quality-to-price mix at 100.0 out of 100 value points.
Price gap
Qwen2.5 Turbo is 1.4x cheaper on input tokens than GLM-4.7-Flash (Reasoning).
Speed gap
Qwen2.5 Turbo generates about 1.3x as many tokens per second as GLM-4.7-Flash (Reasoning).
Reasoning gap
GLM-4.7-Flash (Reasoning) leads Qwen2.5 Turbo by 0.6 points on reasoning.
Top-pick rationale
GLM-4.7-Flash (Reasoning) wins 6 measurable categories, including TTFT, Reasoning, Intelligence, GPQA.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
GLM-4.7-Flash (Reasoning)
Z AI
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Qwen2.5 Turbo
Alibaba
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Full Comparison
| Metric | Top Pick Z GLM-4.7-Flash (Reasoning) | Al Qwen2.5 Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $0.07/1M | $0.05/1M |
| Output Cost | $0.40/1M | $0.20/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.15/1M | $0.09/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | Z AI | Alibaba |
| Release Date | Jan 19, 2026 | Nov 18, 2024 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | 83.5 tok/s | 112.2 tok/s |
| TTFT | 883ms | 1020ms |
| Latency | 24823ms | 1020ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 58.5 | 100.0 |
| Reasoning Score | 29.4 | 28.8 |
| Intelligence | 22.9 | 6.3 |
| Coding | 25.9 | — |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 58.1% | 41.0% |
| MMLU Pro | — | 63.3% |
| HLE | 7.1% | 4.2% |
| LiveCodeBench | — | 16.3% |
| MATH 500 | — | 80.5% |
| AIME (Original) | — | 12.0% |
| SciCode | 33.7% | 15.3% |
| LCR | 35.0% | — |
| IFBench | 60.8% | — |
| TAU-bench v2 | 98.8% | — |
| TerminalBench Hard | 22.0% | — |
Key Takeaways
Qwen2.5 Turbo offers the best value at $0.05/1M, making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
GLM-4.7-Flash (Reasoning) has the strongest reasoning profile with a 29.4 reasoning score, combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
GLM-4.7-Flash (Reasoning) reaches a 25.9 coding index, making it the top choice for software development and code generation tasks.
All models support context windows of ∞+ tokens, suitable for processing lengthy documents and maintaining extended conversations.
When to Choose Each Model
GLM-4.7-Flash (Reasoning)
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
- Code generation
- Software development
Qwen2.5 Turbo
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
