GLM-4.7 (Non-reasoning) vs. Qwen3 32B (Reasoning)
Comparison between GLM-4.7 (Non-reasoning) and Qwen3 32B (Reasoning) across intelligence, price, speed, context window and more.
For details relating to our methodology, see our Methodology page.
Highlights
Model Comparison
GLM-4.7 (Non-reasoning) | Qwen3 32B (Reasoning) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence Index | 27* | 12 | GLM-4.7 (Non-reasoning) is more intelligent than Qwen3 32B (Reasoning) |
| Price per 1M Tokens | $0.76 | $1.47 | GLM-4.7 (Non-reasoning) is cheaper than Qwen3 32B (Reasoning) |
| Output Speed | 102 tokens/s | 90 tokens/s | GLM-4.7 (Non-reasoning) is faster than Qwen3 32B (Reasoning) |
| Time to First Token | 1.00s | 2.47s | GLM-4.7 (Non-reasoning) responds faster than Qwen3 32B (Reasoning) |
| Context Window | 200k tokens~300 A4 pages of size 12 Arial font | 33k tokens~49 A4 pages of size 12 Arial font | GLM-4.7 (Non-reasoning) has a larger context window than Qwen3 32B (Reasoning) |
| Release Date | December 2025 | April 2025 | GLM-4.7 (Non-reasoning) has a more recent release date than Qwen3 32B (Reasoning) |
| Parameters | 357B, 32B active at inference time | 32.8B | GLM-4.7 (Non-reasoning) has more parameters than Qwen3 32B (Reasoning) |
| Reasoning | No | Yes | Qwen3 32B (Reasoning) has reasoning while GLM-4.7 (Non-reasoning) does not |
| Image Input Support | No | No | Neither GLM-4.7 (Non-reasoning) nor Qwen3 32B (Reasoning) have image input support |
| Open Source (Weights) | Both GLM-4.7 (Non-reasoning) and Qwen3 32B (Reasoning) are open source | ||
| License | |||
| License Supports Commercial Use Without Restrictions | Yes | Yes | Both GLM-4.7 (Non-reasoning) and Qwen3 32B (Reasoning) have license supports commercial use without restrictions |
Intelligence
Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index
Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index by Open Weights / Proprietary
Intelligence Evaluations
Agentic real-world work tasks, (Elo-500)/2000
Agentic tool use
Agentic coding & terminal use
Coding
Reasoning & knowledge
Scientific reasoning
Physics reasoning
Knowledge
1 - hallucination rate
Long context reasoning
Agentic knowledge work, Elo
Agentic SaaS workflows
Legal agentic work, criterion pass rate
Agentic business operations
Instruction following
Long-horizon agentic tasks
Kubernetes incident root-cause analysis
Visual reasoning
AA-Briefcase
AA-Briefcase Elo
AA-Omniscience
AA-Omniscience Index
Openness Index
Artificial Analysis Openness Index: Score
Intelligence Index Comparisons
Intelligence Index vs. Cost per Intelligence Index Task
Token Use
Output Tokens per Intelligence Index Task
Cost
Cost per Intelligence Index Task
Cost to Run Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index
Pricing: Cache Hit, Input, and Output
Context Window
Context Window
Speed
Measured by Output Speed (tokens per second)
Output Speed
Time per Intelligence Index Task
Latency
Measured by Time (seconds) to First Token
Latency: Time To First Answer Token
End-to-End Response Time
Seconds to output 500 tokens, calculated based on time to first token, 'thinking' time for reasoning models, and output speed
End-to-End Response Time
Model Size (Open Weights Models Only)
Model Size: Total and Active Parameters
Frequently Asked Questions
GLM-4.7 (Non-reasoning) is more intelligent. GLM-4.7 (Non-reasoning) scores 27 (estimated), compared with Qwen3 32B (Reasoning) at 12 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index.
GLM-4.7 (Non-reasoning) is faster. GLM-4.7 (Non-reasoning) generates 101.5 tokens per second, compared with Qwen3 32B (Reasoning) at 90.2 tokens per second.
GLM-4.7 (Non-reasoning) is cheaper. GLM-4.7 (Non-reasoning) costs $0.76 per 1M tokens, compared with Qwen3 32B (Reasoning) at $1.47 per 1M tokens (7:2:1 cache hit/input/output ratio).
GLM-4.7 (Non-reasoning) has lower latency. GLM-4.7 (Non-reasoning) has a time to first token of 1.00s, compared with Qwen3 32B (Reasoning) at 2.47s.
GLM-4.7 (Non-reasoning) has a larger context window. GLM-4.7 (Non-reasoning) supports 200k tokens, compared with Qwen3 32B (Reasoning) at 33k tokens.