Free to start

Google: Gemma 3 12B vs Z.ai: GLM 5.1

Try both on us. Starter credit covers your first requests, then one key routes Gemma 3 12B and GLM 5.1. Switch by changing the model name.

Compare routesProviders, price, context, and policy posture in one view.

Use auto when uptime mattersKeep a primary model and let fallback handle provider failures.

Same API shapeUse the OpenAI client and set the model you want.

Practical read

Monthly evidence

Google: Gemma 3 12B has the lower published input-plus-output rate. Z.ai: GLM 5.1 has more Credits provider routes, the larger context window and the lower measured p50 time to first token.

$0.15825/1MGoogle: Gemma 3 12B cheapest route

$4.2833/1MZ.ai: GLM 5.1 cheapest route

1152 msGoogle: Gemma 3 12B fastest measured p50 TTFT via amazon-bedrock

1052 msZ.ai: GLM 5.1 fastest measured p50 TTFT via friendli

The price comparison adds each route's rate for one million input tokens and one million output tokens; your cost depends on your input/output mix. Prices and live route measurements can change. Use the monthly reports when you need a stable evidence window, then run a small task-specific eval before choosing a production default.

Google: Gemma 3 12BZ.ai: GLM 5.1

Model idgoogle/gemma-3-12b-itz-ai/glm-5.1

Publisher Google AI Studio Z.AI

AI IQ — IQ 112#67

Context131,072 tokens202,752 tokens

Credits provider routes613

Cheapest route$0.15825/1M$4.2833/1M

Cached input$0.05275/1M$0.10339/1M to $0.738648/1M

Privacy posturehas ZDR routehas Confidential route (E2EE + ZDR)

Fastest measured p50 TTFT1152 ms via amazon-bedrock1052 ms via friendli

Highest measured throughput107 tok/s via nextbit-eunot enough data

Recent route uptime range100.00%100.00%

Modes chat chat

Google: Gemma 3 12B routes

Overview6 Credits routes
PricingInput, cached input, and output rates
ProvidersAll serving providers

Z.ai: GLM 5.1 routes

Overview13 Credits routes
PricingInput, cached input, and output rates
BenchmarksTrustedRouter and external sources
ProvidersAll serving providers

Related comparisons

Browse every comparison

Z.ai: GLM 5.1 vs Z.ai: GLM 5.346 combined provider routes
Z.ai: GLM 5.1 vs Z.ai: GLM 5.245 combined provider routes
Z.ai: GLM 5.1 vs Z.ai: GLM 5.3 Flash45 combined provider routes
MoonshotAI: Kimi K3 vs Z.ai: GLM 5.141 combined provider routes
DeepSeek: DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 vs Z.ai: GLM 5.139 combined provider routes
Google: Gemma 3 12B vs Z.ai: GLM 5.339 combined provider routes
Google: Gemma 3 12B vs Z.ai: GLM 5.238 combined provider routes
Google: Gemma 3 12B vs Z.ai: GLM 5.3 Flash38 combined provider routes

Production choice

Pick a default model. Keep fallback enabled.

TrustedRouter is useful when you know the model you want, but still need provider rollover, budget limits, usage records, and a prompt path you can verify.

OpenAI clientPython

client = OpenAI(
    base_url="https://api.trustedrouter.com/v1",
    api_key="sk-tr-v1-..."
)

response = client.chat.completions.create(
    model="google/gemma-3-12b-it",
    messages=messages,
)

Questions

Which should I use, Google: Gemma 3 12B or Z.ai: GLM 5.1?

Google: Gemma 3 12B has the lower published input-plus-output rate. Z.ai: GLM 5.1 has more Credits provider routes, the larger context window and the lower measured p50 time to first token.

Is Google: Gemma 3 12B or Z.ai: GLM 5.1 cheaper?

The current cheapest TrustedRouter route is $0.15825/1M for Google: Gemma 3 12B and $4.2833/1M for Z.ai: GLM 5.1. The comparison uses current catalog prices and updates as provider pricing changes.

Is Google: Gemma 3 12B or Z.ai: GLM 5.1 faster?

Current measured p50 time to first token is 1152 ms for Google: Gemma 3 12B and 1052 ms for Z.ai: GLM 5.1. These are routed probe measurements, not vendor-advertised speeds, and update as new samples arrive.

Can I test Google: Gemma 3 12B and Z.ai: GLM 5.1 with the same API?

Yes. Use the same OpenAI-compatible TrustedRouter base URL and API key, then change only the model id between google/gemma-3-12b-it and z-ai/glm-5.1. This makes side-by-side evals possible without maintaining two provider integrations.