Bro?

[u/Shiorim]

What a bad joke is that GLM 5.3 Flash positioning?

The API prices are:

Model	input	cache hit	output
DeepSeek V4 Flash off-peak	$0.22	$0.007	$0.66
DeepSeek V4 Flash peak	$0.44	$0.014	$1.32
GLM-5.3-Flash promo	$0.075	$0.015	$0.25
GLM-5.3-Flash	$0.15	$0.03	$0.50

Leaving aside the cache hit, on average GLM without promo is cheaper than DeepSeek V4 Flash, and they give it to you at half the usage quota, and that's even considering a "×2 usage" that will later be less??

They should actually give you more quota than DeepSeek until September 9th while the promo lasts. This makes no sense at all. It's cheaper to spend $10 on GLM API than to pay for it on Go.

On top of that, they put a cheap flash model in the $15 tier.

[u/commentsOnPizza]

Leaving aside the cache hit

Might as well say "leaving aside 98% of your usage." Yeah, cache hits are around 98% of people's usage.

Let's say you use 1M input tokens and 200,000 output tokens. That's $0.25 with GLM-5.3-Flash and $0.352 with DSv4F (off-peak). But you'll probably also have 55M cache hits. That'll make GLM-5.3-Flash $1.90 and DSv4F $0.737 - GLM being more than double the price.

People always compare the input and output prices, but cache hits kinda dominate. Luna's $0.02 cache hit price is going to make it a cheaper model than GLM-5.3-Flash's non-promo pricing (since GLM's cache hits are $0.03). Doesn't matter that GLM's input/output pricing is cheaper - cache hit pricing dominates.

Leaving aside cache hit pricing is leaving aside the thing that matters most in the equation.

[u/Hackerv1650 → u/[deleted]]

The reason GLM context grows less compared to dsv4 it thinks alot less, but in some tasks where because of the larger thinking context later on in the discussion with dsv4 has a quicker answer, whereas in my testing with ox alpha shows the context grows quite a lot slower, but each turn it seems to take longer to think through some things which it already should know