Model decision surface
Compare AI models
Start with Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 and GLM 5 Turbo, or choose any two current ranked language models. Compare capability evidence, price, context, provider availability, and weight access without pretending one field decides every use case.
Current public data
Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 vs GLM 5 Turbo
Live dataset updated 9/9/2026, 9:50:24 PM UTC
Open 1200×630 evidence receipt| Field | GLM 5 Turbo Z.ai | |
|---|---|---|
| ModelCap position | #75 | #73 |
| Index score | 50.6 | 51.0 |
| Evidence | Measured2 public benchmark observations across 2 boards | Measuredpublisher-corpus-prior over 180 held-out anchors (64%); 1 specialist-board observation at 1.3% support (36%); shrunk 24.3 up toward the measured corpus |
| Input / 1M | $0.23 | $1.20 |
| Output / 1M | $2.30 | $4.00 |
| Pricing status | fresh | fresh |
| Context | 131K | 203K |
| Providers | 3 | 1 |
| Weight access | Open weights | API only |
Decision facts
- Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 is #75; GLM 5 Turbo is #73 on the same current language board.
- Index scores are 50.6 for Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 and 51.0 for GLM 5 Turbo. Their published uncertainty intervals overlap, so the rank difference alone does not establish a reliable capability advantage for your workload.
- Both positions use Measured evidence.
- Listed output price per 1M tokens is $2.30 for Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 and $4.00 for GLM 5 Turbo. For 1,000 requests with 2,000 input and 500 output tokens each (2M input + 0.5M output), the listed-rate estimate is $1.61 for Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 versus $4.40 for GLM 5 Turbo. Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 costs 63.4% less in this scenario. This excludes caching, batch discounts, prompt-length tiers, tool charges and retries; verify the selected endpoint before budgeting.
- Published context is 131,072 tokens for Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 and 202,752 for GLM 5 Turbo.
- Weight access differs: Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 is open; GLM 5 Turbo is none.
- ModelCap currently lists 3 providers for Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 and 1 for GLM 5 Turbo.
These are separate published fields, not a synthetic winner. ModelCap does not collapse price, access, context, and capability evidence into a hidden recommendation score.
Popular comparisons
- Muse Spark 1.3 vs GPT-6 Astra#2 vs #1 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs GPT-6 Astra#3 vs #1 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs Muse Spark 1.3#3 vs #2 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Opus 5 vs GPT-6 Astra#4 vs #1 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Opus 5 vs Muse Spark 1.3#4 vs #2 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs Claude Opus 5#3 vs #4 on the ModelCap Index
- GPT-6 Astra vs Grok 4.6#1 vs #5 on the ModelCap Index
- Muse Spark 1.3 vs Grok 4.6#2 vs #5 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs Grok 4.6#3 vs #5 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Opus 5 vs Grok 4.6#4 vs #5 on the ModelCap Index
- GPT-5.6 Sol vs GPT-6 Astra#6 vs #1 on the ModelCap Index
- Muse Spark 1.3 vs GPT-5.6 Sol#2 vs #6 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs GPT-5.6 Sol#3 vs #6 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Opus 5 vs GPT-5.6 Sol#4 vs #6 on the ModelCap Index
- GPT-5.6 Sol vs Grok 4.6#6 vs #5 on the ModelCap Index
- Kimi K3 vs GPT-6 Astra#7 vs #1 on the ModelCap Index
- Muse Spark 1.3 vs Kimi K3#2 vs #7 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs Kimi K3#3 vs #7 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Opus 5 vs Kimi K3#4 vs #7 on the ModelCap Index
- Kimi K3 vs Grok 4.6#7 vs #5 on the ModelCap Index
- Kimi K3 vs GPT-5.6 Sol#7 vs #6 on the ModelCap Index
- Gemini 3.8 Flash vs GPT-6 Astra#8 vs #1 on the ModelCap Index
- Gemini 3.8 Flash vs Muse Spark 1.3#8 vs #2 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs Gemini 3.8 Flash#3 vs #8 on the ModelCap Index
Each comparison page is a permanent, shareable URL with the same live figures as this tool: ModelCap Index position, API pricing, context window, provider count, weight access and every shared benchmark board.