Roboflow

GLM 5V Turbo vs Qwen3.5 9b

Compare GLM 5V Turbo and Qwen3.5 9b side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Image Captioning, OCR, and Open Prompt.

Compare GLM 5V Turbo vs Qwen3.5 9b live

Run the same image across every model that supports a task and compare their outputs side-by-side.

Extract and compare text from images across multiple models.

Open OCR in the full playground
Z.aiGLM 5V Turbo
Run to compare this model.
QwenQwen3.5 9b
Run to compare this model.

Models in this comparison

GLM 5V Turbo vs Qwen3.5 9b on Vision Evals

GLM 5V Turbo scores higher on 2 of the 4 Vision Evals tasks.

The widest gap is Object Detection, where GLM 5V Turbo leads 56.5% to 38.1%.

Overall, GLM 5V Turbo averages 54.6% (#47 of 61) against 56.0% (#40 of 61) for Qwen3.5 9b.

Qwen3.5 9b is cheaper ($0.0021 vs $0.0037 per sample), while GLM 5V Turbo is faster (5.9s vs 41.4s per sample).

GLM 5V TurboQwen3.5 9b

GLM 5V Turbo vs Qwen3.5 9b Comparison Table

Evals updated October 8, 2026Pricing updated October 9, 2026

PropertyGLM 5V TurboQwen3.5 9b
OrganizationZ.aiQwen
Categoryclosedopen
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateApr 2026Mar 2026
Context Window200K262K
ParametersUnknown9B
LicenseProprietaryApache 2.0
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$1.20$0.100
Output $/1M$4.00$0.150
Vision Tasks
CaptioningDemoDemo
Chart Question AnsweringSupportedSupported
ClassificationDemoSupported
Document Question AnsweringSupportedSupported
Image TaggingSupportedSupported
Multi-Label ClassificationSupportedSupported
Object DetectionDemoSupported
OCRDemoDemo
Vision LanguageSupportedSupported
Visual Question AnsweringDemoDemo
Model Features
Foundation VisionSupportedSupported
LLMs with Vision CapabilitiesSupportedSupported
Multimodal VisionSupportedSupported
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 5 vision tasks, pooled at low effort
Overall
54.6%
56.0%
4/5 tasks
Quantizationsself-hosted
BF1656.0%FP854.8%AWQ-INT457.4%hardware →
Avg cost / sample$0.0037$0.0021
Avg speed / sample5.89s41.36s
By task
Object Detection
56.5%
$0.0052
38.1%
±5.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 33.5 to 44.9
$0
Counting
48.6%
$0.0017
56.8%
±1.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 55.4 to 58.1
$0
Identification
84.4%
$0.0015
83.3%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.3 to 84.4
$0
OCR (low)
51.5%
$0.0039
–
by category
Single value
43.0%
Transcription
78.0%
Structured JSON
67.5%
Text localization
17.7%
OCR (high)
56.0%
$0.0080
–
by category
Single value
44.4%
Transcription
77.8%
Structured JSON
69.6%
Text localization
38.7%
Reasoning (low)
31.8%
$0.0017
45.9%
±1.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 44.4 to 47.7
$0
Reasoning (high)
49.7%
$0.0069
–

GLM 5V Turbo vs Qwen3.5 9b: Overview

GLM 5V Turbo

GLM-5V-Turbo is a native multimodal model from Z.ai that extends the GLM family with joint image, video, and text input aimed at vision-centered coding and agent workflows. The model reads screenshots, design drafts, document layouts, and interface captures and generates runnable code from them, covering tasks such as turning a visual design into a working front end, diagnosing rendering and layout defects from screen captures, and operating graphical user interfaces during long-horizon agent runs. It accepts roughly 200,000 input tokens and can emit up to 131,072 output tokens in a single response, which supports sessions that hold specifications, source files, logs, and visual references at the same time.

Training includes a joint reinforcement learning stage spanning more than 30 tasks simultaneously, an approach Z.ai describes as a way to counter the trade-off in which improving visual recognition degrades programming ability and the reverse. Reported evaluations cover pure-text coding on the backend, frontend, and repository exploration tracks of CC-Bench-V2, together with agent execution suites such as PinchBench, ClawEval, and ZClawBench, indicating that text coding behavior is retained after visual input is added.

Qwen3.5 9b

Qwen3.5-9B is a 9-billion-parameter multimodal foundation model developed by Alibaba Cloud's Qwen team, released on March 2, 2026 as part of the Qwen3.5 model family. Designed for efficient multimodal reasoning and long-context language tasks, it notably outperforms the older Qwen3-30B, a model more than three times its size, on key benchmarks including GPQA Diamond, IFEval, and LongBench.

The model supports vision-language inputs through an early-fusion multimodal architecture built on a dense hybrid foundation of Gated Delta Networks and Gated Attention. It can also operate in a text-only mode by skipping the vision encoder during inference. It provides a 262,144-token context window (extensible to ~1M tokens via YaRN) and is released under the Apache License 2.0. Within the current AI landscape, Qwen3.5-9B offers a strong balance of capability and efficiency, making it well-suited for multimodal assistants, document analysis, long-context reasoning, and developer-deployed agentic systems.

Frequently Asked Questions

On Roboflow's Vision Evals, Qwen3.5 9b performed slightly better overall. The two split the 4 vision tasks 2 to 2, but Qwen3.5 9b averages 56.0% (#40 of 61) against 54.6% (#47 of 61) for GLM 5V Turbo. These scores measure vision capabilities only; either model may perform differently on work outside this benchmark's tasks.

Yes. On the Vision Evals Object Detection benchmark at low effort, GLM 5V Turbo leads with 56.5% against 38.1%. This is the widest gap between the two models across the benchmark's tasks.

Qwen3.5 9b is cheaper to run. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals task mix it averaged $0.0021 per sample against $0.0037. Actual costs depend on your image sizes, prompts, and output length.

GLM 5V Turbo is faster. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals it averaged 5.9s per inference against 41.4s. Latency varies with image size, prompt length, and provider load, so treat these as relative rather than guaranteed figures.

Yes. The comparison demo on this page runs both models on the same image side by side for image captioning and OCR in the free Roboflow Playground. You can try it instantly, and a free account unlocks unlimited runs.