Side-by-side comparison
Step 3.5 Flash vs GLM 4.7 Flash
| Step 3.5 Flash | GLM 4.7 Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | StepFun | Z.ai |
| Context window Maximum tokens (input + output) the model can process in a single request. Glossary → | 262,144 | 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 → | 0.1000 | 0.0600 |
| Output $ / 1M tokens Cost for tokens the model generates. Output is normally 3–5× pricier than input. Glossary → | 0.3000 | 0.4000 |
Frequently asked questions
Which is cheaper, Step 3.5 Flash or GLM 4.7 Flash?
Step 3.5 Flash is cheaper than GLM 4.7 Flash on a 50/50 input/output blend by about $0.03 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, Step 3.5 Flash or GLM 4.7 Flash?
Step 3.5 Flash has the larger context window at 262k tokens versus 203k tokens for GLM 4.7 Flash. That means Step 3.5 Flash can ingest about 1.3x as much text per request.
What is the difference between Step 3.5 Flash and GLM 4.7 Flash?
Step 3.5 Flash comes from StepFun; GLM 4.7 Flash 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.