Side-by-side comparison
R1 0528 vs GLM 4.6
| R1 0528 | GLM 4.6 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | DeepSeek | Z.ai |
| Context window Maximum tokens (input + output) the model can process in a single request. Glossary → | 163,840 | 202,752 |
| Capabilities Optional capabilities the model advertises: vision (images), tools (function calling), json_mode (structured output). | tools, json_mode | tools, json_mode |
| Input $ / 1M tokens Cost for tokens you send (prompt + context). Cheaper side highlighted. Glossary → | 0.5000 | 0.4300 |
| Output $ / 1M tokens Cost for tokens the model generates. Output is normally 3–5× pricier than input. Glossary → | 2.1500 | 1.7400 |
Frequently asked questions
Which is cheaper, R1 0528 or GLM 4.6?
GLM 4.6 is cheaper than R1 0528 on a 50/50 input/output blend by about $0.24 per 1M tokens. Exact savings depend on your input-vs-output ratio — use the cost calculator on this page for a workload-specific estimate.
Which has a larger context window, R1 0528 or GLM 4.6?
GLM 4.6 has the larger context window at 203k tokens versus 164k tokens for R1 0528. That means GLM 4.6 can ingest about 1.2x as much text per request.
What is the difference between R1 0528 and GLM 4.6?
R1 0528 comes from DeepSeek; GLM 4.6 comes from Z.ai. They differ in pricing, context window, and supported capabilities — see the side-by-side table on this page for the exact figures, refreshed nightly.