Home / Compare / Qwen3.8 27B vs GLM 5.3 Flash

Qwen3.8 27B vs GLM 5.3 Flash

For a typical chat reply (2,000 tokens in, 400 out), Qwen3.8 27B costs 4.1× as much as GLM 5.3 Flash: $2.04 against $0.50 per 1,000 requests at list price on 2026-09-28.

Qwen3.8 27BGLM 5.3 Flash
Input, per 1M tokens$0.42$0.15
Output, per 1M tokens$3.00$0.50
Context window1M1.31M
Classification or routing (600 tokens in, 10 out), per 1,000$0.282$0.095
Chat reply (2,000 in, 400 out), per 1,000$2.04$0.50
Retrieval-augmented answer (8,000 in, 500 out), per 1,000$4.86$1.45
Confidence signalyesyes
Tool callingyesyes
BANKING77, correct of 400264320

Which one should carry your traffic?

If GLM 5.3 Flash answers your requests as well as Qwen3.8 27B, moving that traffic saves 75% on chat-shaped requests. Averages cannot tell you whether it does for your requests. GLM 5.3 Flash exposes a confidence signal, so Gimbix can let it answer first and hand unsure cases to Qwen3.8 27B.

Qwen3.8 27B profile · GLM 5.3 Flash profile · Measure it on your traffic