$ diff lfm2-5-24b-a2b glm-5-3-flash
LFM2.5-24B-A2B vs GLM-5.3-Flash
Values come from LFM2.5-24B-A2B and GLM-5.3-Flash, where each is cited to its source. This page states no benchmark result and ranks neither model — it puts two published specifications next to each other. Where a lab has not published a figure, the row says so rather than guessing.
Liquid AILFM2.5-24B-A2B
- context
- 131K
- weights
- —
- $/M in
- $0.1
- $/M out
- $1
- context
- 1.0M
- weights
- open
- $/M in
- $0.15
- $/M out
- $0.5
What actually differs
- Context window
- GLM-5.3-Flash takes 1.0M against 131K — 8× more room in a single request.
- Input price
- LFM2.5-24B-A2B at $0.1/M against $0.15/M — 1.5× cheaper to feed. Standard rates: one of these labs also quotes a lower cached-input tier, which applies only when a prefix is reused — see the full spec below.
- Output price
- GLM-5.3-Flash at $0.5/M against $1/M — 2.0× cheaper to generate. Output dominates the bill on most agentic workloads, where the model writes far more than it reads.
- Recency
- LFM2.5-24B-A2B shipped 48 days after GLM-5.3-Flash (2026-10-13 vs 2026-08-26).
Full spec
| Attribute | LFM2.5-24B-A2B | GLM-5.3-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Developer | Liquid AI | Z.ai |
| Released | 2026-10-13 | 2026-08-26 |
| Context window | 131,072 tokens | 1,048,576 (1M) |
| Pricing | $0.10/M input · $0.05/M cached input · $1.00/M output | $0.15/M input · $0.03/M cached input · $0.50/M output |
| License | not recorded | MIT |
| Availability | Downloadable base and post-trained weights; Liquid Playground and API | Hugging Face (open weights), Z.ai API |