GLM-5.2 vs Qwen3.7-Max

GLM-5.2 and Qwen3.7-Max are both current production-tier models. GLM-5.2 is meaningfully cheaper at $1.4 / $4.4 per 1M. GLM-5.2 leads on coding.

Specs side by side

Metric
Z.ai
GLM-5.2
Alibaba
Qwen3.7-Max
Input price (per 1M)$1.4$2.5
Output price (per 1M)$4.4$7.5
Context window1M tokens1M tokens
Speed tierbalancedbalanced
Open weightsYesNo
EU regionNoNo
Free tierbigmodel.cnNo
Prompt cachingYesYes
Vision inputNoNo
Extended thinkingYesYes

When to choose each

Z.ai Free tier

Choose GLM-5.2 if…

  • Cost is a priority ($1.4 / $4.4 per 1M vs $2.5 / $7.5 per 1M)
  • You need open weights for self-hosting or fine-tuning
  • You want a free tier for prototyping
  • Coding is central to your workload
Alibaba

Choose Qwen3.7-Max if…

  • Qwen3.7-Max is in the same tier as GLM-5.2 — pick by provider preference or API ecosystem

Benchmark delta

GLM-5.2 leads on

  • Coding

Qwen3.7-Max leads on

Qwen3.7-Max has no meaningful benchmark lead in this pair.

FAQ — GLM-5.2 vs Qwen3.7-Max

GLM-5.2 vs Qwen3.7-Max — which is better?

GLM-5.2 and Qwen3.7-Max are both current production-tier models. GLM-5.2 is meaningfully cheaper at $1.4 / $4.4 per 1M. GLM-5.2 leads on coding. The right pick depends on your use case — see "When to choose each" above for a data-driven decision.

How does GLM-5.2 pricing compare to Qwen3.7-Max?

GLM-5.2 costs $1.4 / $4.4 per 1M vs Qwen3.7-Max at $2.5 / $7.5 per 1M. GLM-5.2 is cheaper on output tokens by roughly 70%. Both support prompt caching, which reduces effective cost by 80-90% on repeat system prompts.

Does GLM-5.2 or Qwen3.7-Max have the bigger context window?

Qwen3.7-Max has a 1M-token context window — 1× the 1M context of GLM-5.2. Enough for entire codebases, books, or multi-document RAG.

Is there a free tier for GLM-5.2 or Qwen3.7-Max?

GLM-5.2: yes — Free tier with monthly token allowance. Qwen3.7-Max: no — No free API tier; Alibaba Model Studio gives new accounts trial credits.

Which is better for coding — GLM-5.2 or Qwen3.7-Max?

GLM-5.2 leads on coding benchmarks (GLM-5.2: 93/100, Qwen3.7-Max: 88/100). For production coding agents also weigh tool-use performance — GLM-5.2 scores 86, Qwen3.7-Max scores 86.