Side-by-side comparison of pricing, 12 benchmarks, and generation speed.
| Metric | Ling 3.0 Tiny | GLM-4.5V (Non-reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| Input ($/M tokens) | $0 | $0.6 |
| Output ($/M tokens) | $0 | $1.8 |
Verdict. Ling 3.0 Tiny wins the overall benchmark matchup 2–0 across 2 overlapping categories, but raw benchmark score is only one input to the decision.
Pricing. Pricing varies significantly between these models — check the table above for the exact per-token rates. Many production workloads actually surface input-token cost (retrieval-augmented prompts, code-context windows), so factor both directions.
Strengths. Ling 3.0 Tiny is strongest on Coding Index (26.5), Intelligence Index (24.5). GLM-4.5V (Non-reasoning) leads on Intelligence Index (6.8).
Speed. On throughput, Ling 3.0 Tiny generates tokens at 175 tok/s versus 92 tok/s — about 47% faster. On time-to-first-token, GLM-4.5V (Non-reasoning) responds in 1850ms vs 2570ms, which matters most for chat-style UIs.
Provider. InclusionAI and Z AI sell to overlapping but distinct developer audiences: InclusionAI tends to ship frontier reasoning models with premium positioning, while Z AI often prices more aggressively. Your existing vendor relationships, billing, and SLA preferences may matter as much as the raw numbers above.
Workload cost. Workload scenarios (per million requests at 30M input + 15M output tokens): Ling 3.0 Tiny costs $0.00 ($0/year); GLM-4.5V (Non-reasoning) costs $45.00 ($540/year). At a smaller 5M-input/2M-output scale (single-developer tool or prototype): Ling 3.0 Tiny ≈ $0.00/run, GLM-4.5V (Non-reasoning) ≈ $6.60/run. At agent/realtime scale (200M input / 100M output per million requests): Ling 3.0 Tiny ≈ $0/run, GLM-4.5V (Non-reasoning) ≈ $300/run. Ling 3.0 Tiny becomes more attractive at higher volume — the absolute per-token pricing difference compounds when you ship at scale.
Recommendation. Both models have legitimate use cases — the right answer depends on whether you are optimizing for benchmark ceiling, latency, or unit cost. Start with the cheaper / faster model, evaluate against your specific task, and only switch if the upgrade shows a meaningful lift.
Head-to-head deltas
Data from Artificial Analysis API — 12 benchmarks
Ling 3.0 Tiny is cheaper overall. Its blended price (3:1 input/output ratio) is $0.00/M tokens vs $0.90/M for GLM-4.5V (Non-reasoning).
Ling 3.0 Tiny wins 2 out of 12 benchmarks compared to 0 for GLM-4.5V (Non-reasoning). See the detailed benchmark chart above for per-category results.
Ling 3.0 Tiny generates tokens faster at 175 tok/s vs 92 tok/s. However, GLM-4.5V (Non-reasoning) has lower time-to-first-token (1.85s vs 2.57s).
Choose based on your priorities: Ling 3.0 Tiny for lower cost, Ling 3.0 Tiny for stronger benchmark performance, and Ling 3.0 Tiny for faster generation. For latency-sensitive apps, check the TTFT comparison above.