GLM 5.1 vs Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
Pricing, context window and real answers (September 2026)
GLM 5.1 (Z.ai) and Llama 3.3 70B Instruct (Meta), compared as you can actually call them on FastMetal. Both are served from the same OpenAI-compatible endpoint and API key; switching is a change to the model string.
Specs and pricing
| Provider | Z.ai | Meta |
|---|---|---|
| Input (per 1M tokens) | ¥250.18 | ¥17.87 |
| Output (per 1M tokens) | ¥786.28 | ¥57.18 |
| Typical cost (1,000 in + 500 out tokens × 1,000 calls) | ¥643 | ¥46 |
| Context window | 204,800 tokens | 131,072 tokens |
| Release date | 4/7/2026 | 12/6/2024 |
| Input modalities | text | text |
| Throughput (p50) | — | — |
| Arena · overall | #47 · ELO 1,466 | #250 · ELO 1,318 |
| Arena · Japanese | #46 · ELO 1,434 | #210 · ELO 1,212 |
| Arena · coding | #45 · ELO 1,513 | #263 · ELO 1,346 |
Prices are FastMetal's yen rates before tax. Arena ranks are as of the latest leaderboard scrape.
Which should you pick?
- On price, Llama 3.3 70B Instruct: ¥57.18 per 1M output tokens, 93% less than GLM 5.1.
- On the Overall arena board, GLM 5.1 ranks higher (#47; Llama 3.3 70B Instruct is #250).
- On the Japanese arena board, GLM 5.1 ranks higher (#46; Llama 3.3 70B Instruct is #210).
- On the Coding arena board, GLM 5.1 ranks higher (#45; Llama 3.3 70B Instruct is #263).
- For long documents, GLM 5.1: a 204,800-token context window against 131,072 for Llama 3.3 70B Instruct.
- If in doubt, try both on the same key. Switching is a change to the model string, and each is billed at its own rate.
Real answers to the same prompts
Exactly what the FastMetal gateway returned, side by side. Not benchmark scores: actual output.
Count the number of 'r's in 'strawberry'
Count the number of 'r's in 'strawberry'. Explain your reasoning step by step.
GLM 5.1
Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
Debug This Error
I'm getting the following error in my Node.js application: TypeError: Cannot read properties of undefined (reading 'map') at UserList (/app/components/UserList.js:12:25) at renderWithHooks (/app/node_modules/rea…
GLM 5.1
Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
Code Review
Please review the following Python function and suggest improvements for readability, performance, and best practices: def get_data(url, retries=3): import requests import time for i in range(retries):…
GLM 5.1
Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
Frequently asked questions
- Which is cheaper, GLM 5.1 or Llama 3.3 70B Instruct?
- Per 1M output tokens, GLM 5.1 is ¥786.28 and Llama 3.3 70B Instruct is ¥57.18 on FastMetal (yen, before tax), so Llama 3.3 70B Instruct is cheaper.
- How do the context windows of GLM 5.1 and Llama 3.3 70B Instruct compare?
- GLM 5.1 takes 204,800 tokens; Llama 3.3 70B Instruct takes 131,072.
- Which ranks higher, GLM 5.1 or Llama 3.3 70B Instruct?
- GLM 5.1 ranks higher on the public arena (GLM 5.1 #46, Llama 3.3 70B Instruct #210). Ranks move as the leaderboard updates.
- Can I use GLM 5.1 and Llama 3.3 70B Instruct with the same API key?
- Yes. On FastMetal's OpenAI-compatible endpoint, switch by passing "glm-5.1" or "llama-3.3-70b-instruct" as the model. Each is billed at its own rate from the same prepaid balance.
Try both on one API key
Create an account and add credit to call GLM 5.1 and Llama 3.3 70B Instruct from the browser chat and the API. No monthly fee.