Free to start

Meta: Llama 3.1 8B Instruct vs Z.ai: GLM 4.7

Try both on us. Starter credit covers your first requests, then one key routes Llama 3.1 8B Instruct and GLM 4.7. 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

Meta: Llama 3.1 8B Instruct has the lower published input-plus-output rate and the lower measured p50 time to first token. Z.ai: GLM 4.7 has more Credits provider routes and the larger context window.

$0.07385/1MMeta: Llama 3.1 8B Instruct cheapest route

$2.26825/1MZ.ai: GLM 4.7 cheapest route

865 msMeta: Llama 3.1 8B Instruct fastest measured p50 TTFT via telnyx

1736 msZ.ai: GLM 4.7 fastest measured p50 TTFT via mancer

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.

Meta: Llama 3.1 8B InstructZ.ai: GLM 4.7

Model idmeta-llama/llama-3.1-8b-instructz-ai/glm-4.7

Publisher Meta Z.AI

AI IQ — IQ 104#104

Context131,072 tokens202,752 tokens

Credits provider routes56

Cheapest route$0.07385/1M$2.26825/1M

Cached input$0.211/1M$0.0844/1M to $0.29962/1M

Privacy posturehas ZDR routehas ZDR route

Fastest measured p50 TTFT865 ms via telnyx1736 ms via mancer

Highest measured throughputnot enough datanot enough data

Recent route uptime range100.00%100.00%

Modes chat chat

Meta: Llama 3.1 8B Instruct routes

Overview5 Credits routes
PricingInput, cached input, and output rates
ProvidersAll serving providers

Z.ai: GLM 4.7 routes

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

Related comparisons

Browse every comparison

Z.ai: GLM 4.7 vs Z.ai: GLM 5.339 combined provider routes
Meta: Llama 3.1 8B Instruct vs Z.ai: GLM 5.338 combined provider routes
Z.ai: GLM 4.7 vs Z.ai: GLM 5.238 combined provider routes
Z.ai: GLM 4.7 vs Z.ai: GLM 5.3 Flash38 combined provider routes
Meta: Llama 3.1 8B Instruct vs Z.ai: GLM 5.237 combined provider routes
Meta: Llama 3.1 8B Instruct vs Z.ai: GLM 5.3 Flash37 combined provider routes
MoonshotAI: Kimi K3 vs Z.ai: GLM 4.734 combined provider routes
Meta: Llama 3.1 8B Instruct vs MoonshotAI: Kimi K333 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="meta-llama/llama-3.1-8b-instruct",
    messages=messages,
)

Questions

Which should I use, Meta: Llama 3.1 8B Instruct or Z.ai: GLM 4.7?

Is Meta: Llama 3.1 8B Instruct or Z.ai: GLM 4.7 cheaper?

The current cheapest TrustedRouter route is $0.07385/1M for Meta: Llama 3.1 8B Instruct and $2.26825/1M for Z.ai: GLM 4.7. The comparison uses current catalog prices and updates as provider pricing changes.

Is Meta: Llama 3.1 8B Instruct or Z.ai: GLM 4.7 faster?

Current measured p50 time to first token is 865 ms for Meta: Llama 3.1 8B Instruct and 1736 ms for Z.ai: GLM 4.7. These are routed probe measurements, not vendor-advertised speeds, and update as new samples arrive.

Can I test Meta: Llama 3.1 8B Instruct and Z.ai: GLM 4.7 with the same API?

Yes. Use the same OpenAI-compatible TrustedRouter base URL and API key, then change only the model id between meta-llama/llama-3.1-8b-instruct and z-ai/glm-4.7. This makes side-by-side evals possible without maintaining two provider integrations.