uttapen

GLM 5.3 Flash vs Qwen3.5-9B (batch)

Both sit behind the same key and the same code on uttapen — the only thing that changes is the model string, so you can run each of them against your own workload without touching anything else. On cost, GLM 5.3 Flash comes out about 1.3× cheaper.

FeatureGLM 5.3 FlashQwen3.5-9B (batch)
ProviderZ.ai (GLM)Qwen (Alibaba)
Model idz-ai/glm-5.3-flashqwen/qwen3.5-9b:batch
Context1,310,720 tokens262,144 tokens
Max output131,072 tokens235,929 tokens
Input / 1M tokens21,759 toman49,321 toman
Output / 1M tokens72,531 toman72,531 toman
≈ one 1,000-word request123 toman158 toman
Input caching4,352 toman / 1MNo
Image inputYesYes
File inputNoNo
Tool callingYesYes
JSON outputYesYes
Reasoning modeYesYes

Which one for what?

GLM 5.3 Flash

  • Multi-step problems, maths, and tracking down a bug
  • Whole documents or a codebase in a single request
  • Reading screenshots, invoices, and scanned forms
  • Agents that call your own APIs and database
  • High-volume work where cost per call decides
123 toman per 1,000 words · Model page

Qwen3.5-9B (batch)

  • Multi-step problems, maths, and tracking down a bug
  • Whole documents or a codebase in a single request
  • Reading screenshots, invoices, and scanned forms
  • Agents that call your own APIs and database
  • High-volume work where cost per call decides
158 toman per 1,000 words · Model page

Run both with the same code

Swap the model value between the two ids and send the same request twice; what each answer cost comes back in the X-Uttapen-Cost-Toman header.

curl https://api.uttapen.ir/v1/chat/completions \
  -H "Authorization: Bearer sk-up-…" \
  -H "Content-Type: application/json" \
  -d '{
    "model": "z-ai/glm-5.3-flash",
    "messages": [{"role": "user", "content": "Introduce yourself in one sentence."}],
    "stream": true
  }'

model = "qwen/qwen3.5-9b:batch"

More comparisons: all pairs · model rankings · full catalogue

base_url = https://api.uttapen.ir/v1