vs
Groq vs Z.ai
Z.ai sells MIT-licensed GLM models cheaply, with a flat-rate coding plan and a free tier. Groq sells speed on a few other open models from its own LPU chip.
By The Subconscious Team · Updated
Groq vs Z.ai: key differences
Z.ai is a Chinese lab selling its own GLM models, and its pitch is value. GLM-5.3 costs $1.40 in and $4.40 out, GLM-5.3-Flash costs $0.075 in and $0.25 out, and several older Flash models are free. The $18 GLM Coding Plan plus an Anthropic-compatible endpoint made GLM a popular cheap engine inside Claude Code. Groq sells no GLM at all. Instead it serves GPT-OSS and Qwen 3.6 on its LPU at several times GPU speeds, with small-model prices near the market floor.
Latency is the sharpest contrast. Z.ai's servers sit mostly in China, adding 100 to 200ms from the US or Europe before generation even starts, and its Coding Plan quota burns faster during Beijing peak hours. Groq's whole product is low and steady latency. Z.ai wins on model strength for coding and on licensing, since MIT weights can be fine-tuned freely, while Groq hosts no fine-tunes and caps context around 131K. A budget coding setup favors Z.ai. A voice agent favors Groq.
What Groq and Z.ai do
Groq
Groq serves open models on its own chip, the LPU, which keeps model weights in on-chip SRAM and runs a deterministic schedule instead of waiting on GPU memory. Groq publishes 1,000 tokens per second on GPT-OSS 20B and 500 on GPT-OSS 120B. Latency stays tight between median and tail, which matters for strict SLAs. The API is OpenAI-compatible and also hosts Whisper for speech to text plus an agentic system called Groq Compound with built-in search and code execution.
Example models: GPT-OSS 120B, Qwen 3.6 27B
Full Groq profileZ.ai
Z.AI is the international brand of Chinese lab Zhipu AI, maker of the GLM models. Its current flagship, GLM-5.3, shipped August 17, 2026 at $1.40 in and $4.40 out per million tokens, with cached input at $0.26. GLM-5.3-Flash costs $0.075 in and $0.25 out, and several older Flash models are priced at zero, a real free tier instead of trial credits. GLM-5, released in February 2026, is a 744B mixture-of-experts model under an MIT license, and at launch it ranked first among open-weight models on the Artificial Analysis index with a record-low hallucination score.
Example models: GLM-5.3, GLM-5.3-Flash
Full Z.ai profileShould you choose Groq or Z.ai?
Groq vs Z.ai at a glance
| Attribute | Groq | Z.ai |
|---|---|---|
| Model access | Open weights | Open weights (MIT) |
| Flagship models | GPT-OSS 120B, Qwen 3.6 27B | GLM-5.3, GLM-5.3-Flash |
| Speed | 500–1,000 tok/s | ~80 tok/s on GLM-5.3 |
| Price | Near the floor on small models | $1.40 in, $4.40 out (GLM-5.3); free Flash tier |
| Customization | No fine-tuned model hosting | Open weights, no license limits |
| Deployment | GroqCloud API | API, GLM Coding Plan |
| Long context | Around 131K max | 1M (GLM-5.3) |
Frequently asked questions
What is the difference between Groq and Z.ai?
Z.ai sells MIT-licensed GLM models cheaply, with a flat-rate coding plan and a free tier. Groq sells speed on a few other open models from its own LPU chip.
When should I choose Groq over Z.ai?
Latency-critical voice and chat from the US or Europe; Fast agent sub-steps on GPT-OSS; Speech to text with Whisper on the same API.
When should I choose Z.ai over Groq?
Budget agentic coding inside Claude Code; Free Flash models for prototyping; Fine-tuning MIT-licensed GLM weights.
Is Groq or Z.ai cheaper?
Groq: Near the floor on small models. Z.ai: $1.40 in, $4.40 out (GLM-5.3); free Flash tier. The cheaper choice depends on the model and workload.
Which has more context, Groq or Z.ai?
Groq: Around 131K max. Z.ai: 1M (GLM-5.3).
Related comparisons
Running long-horizon agents?
If your agents run past 200K tokens, compare both against Subconscious. Our inference stack treats a long-horizon trace as the primary workload, so speed, cost, and accuracy hold up deep into the trace.