Home / Compare / Command R7B (12-2024) vs GLM 5.3 Flash

Command R7B (12-2024) vs GLM 5.3 Flash

For a typical chat reply (2,000 tokens in, 400 out), GLM 5.3 Flash costs 3.7× as much as Command R7B (12-2024): $0.50 against $0.135 per 1,000 requests at list price on 2026-09-28.

Command R7B (12-2024)GLM 5.3 Flash
Input, per 1M tokens$0.0375$0.15
Output, per 1M tokens$0.15$0.50
Context window128K1.31M
Classification or routing (600 tokens in, 10 out), per 1,000$0.024$0.095
Chat reply (2,000 in, 400 out), per 1,000$0.135$0.50
Retrieval-augmented answer (8,000 in, 500 out), per 1,000$0.375$1.45
Confidence signalnoyes
Tool callingnoyes
BANKING77, correct of 400not measured320

Which one should carry your traffic?

If Command R7B (12-2024) answers your requests as well as GLM 5.3 Flash, moving that traffic saves 73% on chat-shaped requests. Averages cannot tell you whether it does for your requests. Command R7B (12-2024) does not expose a confidence signal through OpenRouter, so Gimbix would test it as a full replacement rather than a first answer.

Command R7B (12-2024) profile · GLM 5.3 Flash profile · Measure it on your traffic