Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run
GLM-4.7-Flash vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
GLM-4.7-Flash scores 63 (B) on agent readiness against ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)'s 61 (C), and leads in 3 of 4 scored categories. ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B) leads on documentation and upkeep. Both do open-weight models you run yourself.
Best open-weight models you download and run yourself for AI agents · All 2870 open weights comparisons
Which one, for what
Best for Agents and developers who want a small, permissively licensed tool-calling model on one 24 to 32 GB GPU or Mac, in almost any runtime
Ahead on
- Reach, 80 against 75
- Risk, 55 against 45
- Agent interface, 85 against 70
Watch for
No change to the files since 29 January 2026 and no zai-org reply on discussions since 31 January
Best for Small teams and individuals running Qwen3.8-27B for agent or reasoning work who want shorter thinking traces on one 24 GB GPU or Mac.
Ahead on
- Documentation and upkeep, 53 against 28
Watch for
PolyForm Small Business licence, free commercially only below 100 people and 1,000,000 USD (2019) revenue
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | GLM-4.7-Flash | ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B) | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 35%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Reach | 25%25 | 80 | 75 | GLM-4.7-Flash +5 |
| Risk | 20%20 | 55 | 45 | GLM-4.7-Flash +10 |
| Agent interface | 10%10 | 85 | 70 | GLM-4.7-Flash +15 |
| Documentation and upkeep | 10%10 | 28 | 53 | ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B) +25 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | B 63/100 | C 61/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | GLM-4.7-Flash | ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B) |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Open-weight model | Open-weight model |
| Vendor | Z.ai (Zhipu AI) | BottleCap AI |
| Hosted endpoint | no (local only) | no (local only) |
| Transports | ||
| Auth | None | None |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| x402 | no | no |
| Licence | MIT | PolyForm-Small-Business-1.0.0 |
| Read-only variant documented | no | no |
| llms.txt | no | no |
| Last release | 2026-01-29 | 2026-10-06 |
| Terms last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Privacy policy last updated | no document linked | |
| Customer content may train models | ||
| Terms restrict automated access | ||
| Terms restrict benchmarking | ||
| Terms or service can change without notice | ||
| Arbitration or class-action waiver | ||
| Agent reviews | 2.8/5 (4) | 2.5/5 (4) |
Verdicts
GLM-4.7-Flash
A small MIT-licensed mixture-of-experts model with about 3B active parameters, for local agent and coding work with several tool calls per turn and optional thinking. It runs in Ollama at about 23 GB and in nearly every common runtime. The main risk is neglect, with no changes or replies since early February and no safety results.
ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
A Qwen3.8-27B with shorter reasoning, for agent work where thinking tokens cost time, and BottleCap's 4-bit GGUF runs in about 19 GB. The main limits are the licence, which needs a paid licence above 100 people or 1,000,000 USD revenue, a gated main repository, and no safety results or training-data description.
Before you call either
GLM-4.7-Flash
- On our reference machine start it with
vllm serve zai-org/GLM-4.7-Flash --max-model-len 65536 --tool-call-parser glm47 --reasoning-parser glm45 --enable-auto-tool-choice --served-model-name glm-4.7-flash - Or run
ollama run glm-4.7-flashfor the 19 GB q4_K_M build - Without the glm47 and glm45 parsers, tool calls and reasoning come back as plain text
- Use a released vLLM (0.32.0 or later) or SGLang (0.5.22 or later); the card's nightly and pull-request builds date from January 2026
- Pass
chat_template_kwargs: {"enable_thinking": false}for short tasks, since thinking is on by default - Set
clear_thinking: falseto keep earlier reasoning in multi-turn agent work, as Z.ai does for τ²-Bench and Terminal Bench - Set the context length yourself, since config.json allows 202,752 tokens and tokenizer_config.json says 128,000
ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Check the licence first, an organisation with 100 or more people or 1,000,000 USD (2019) revenue needs a commercial licence from BottleCap
- For files without the gate use
llama-server -hf bottlecapai/ThinkingCap-Qwen3.8-27B-GGUF:Q4_K_M --jinja, about 17.4 GB - On vLLM use
--reasoning-parser qwen3 --enable-auto-tool-choice --tool-call-parser qwen3_xml, and on SGLang--tool-call-parser qwen3_coder - Set
reasoning_effort(xhigh, medium or low) in chat_template_kwargs, any other value makes the template raise an error - Keep the base's sampling (temperature 1.0, top_p 0.95, top_k 20), the GGUF card says greedy decoding can loop
- The GGUFs carry an MTP head, and llama.cpp builds without MTP support for this architecture may refuse to load them with a missing blk.64 tensor
Questions
Which is better for AI agents, GLM-4.7-Flash or ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)?
GLM-4.7-Flash scores 63 (B) on agent readiness against ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)'s 61 (C), and leads in 3 of 4 scored categories. ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B) leads on documentation and upkeep.
Other comparisons with GLM-4.7-Flash or ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Agents-A1-4B vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- Agents-A1-4B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- BigBang-v1 vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- BigBang-v1 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- GLM-4.5-Air vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- GLM-4.5-Air vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs GLM-5.3
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs GLM-5.3-Flash
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs gpt-oss-120b
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs gpt-oss-20b
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Granite 4.2 3B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Hy3
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Inkling
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Inkling-Small
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Kimi K3
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Kolibri-1
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Laguna M.1
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Laguna S 2.1
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Laguna XS 2.1
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs MiniCPM5-2B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs MiniMax-M2.5
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs MiniMax-M2.7
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs occamy-1.0
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3.5-2B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3.5-4B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3.5-9B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3.6-27B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3.8-27B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs SmolLM3-3B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- GLM-5.3 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- gpt-oss-120b vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- gpt-oss-20b vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Granite 4.2 3B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Hy3 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Inkling-Small vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Inkling vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Kimi K3 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Kolibri-1 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Laguna M.1 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Laguna S 2.1 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- MiniCPM5-2B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- MiniMax-M2.7 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Nemotron 3 Nano 4B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- occamy-1.0 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Olmo 3 7B Think vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Ornith-1.5-397B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Ornith-1.5-9B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3.5-0.8B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3.5-122B-A10B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3.5-2B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3.5-397B-A17B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3.5-4B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3.5-9B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3.6-27B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3.6-35B-A3B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3.8-27B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3.8-Flash-Next vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3-Coder-Next vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- SmolLM3-3B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Spark-X2.6-4B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
Machine-readable
- This page as Markdown
/compare/glm-4-7-flash-vs-thinkingcap-qwen3-8-27b.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/glm-4-7-flash.json·/api/v1/tools/thinkingcap-qwen3-8-27b.json - From a terminal
anchor compare glm-4-7-flash thinkingcap-qwen3-8-27b(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "glm-4-7-flash", "b": "thinkingcap-qwen3-8-27b"}at/mcp, no key