OpenAI compatible API · Attested · Public status

Meta: Llama 3.3 70B Instruct vs Z.ai: GLM 5.1

Meta: Llama 3.3 70B Instruct vs Z.ai: GLM 5.1: compare current API pricing, context, provider routes, privacy, p50 latency, and OpenAI-compatible access.

Verify gateway

Onebase URL to migrate

100sof models and routes

0prompt or output logs. Always.

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

Meta: Llama 3.3 70B Instruct has the lower cheapest prompt+completion route on TrustedRouter. Z.ai: GLM 5.1 has more provider fallback routes, while Z.ai: GLM 5.1 has the larger context window. Current TrustedRouter probes show Meta: Llama 3.3 70B Instruct with the lower p50 TTFT.

$0.56175/1MMeta: Llama 3.3 70B Instruct cheapest route

$4.263/1MZ.ai: GLM 5.1 cheapest route

348 msMeta: Llama 3.3 70B Instruct fastest measured p50 TTFT via crusoe

1249 msZ.ai: GLM 5.1 fastest measured p50 TTFT via digitalocean

Meta: Llama 3.3 70B InstructZ.ai: GLM 5.1

Model idmeta-llama/llama-3.3-70b-instructz-ai/glm-5.1

Publisher Cerebras Z.AI

AI IQ — IQ 114#32

Context131,072 tokens204,800 tokens

Provider routes1524

Cheapest route$0.56175/1M$4.263/1M

Privacy posturehas provider E2EE routehas confidential-compute route

Fastest measured p50 TTFT348 ms via crusoe1249 ms via digitalocean

Highest measured throughputnot enough datanot enough data

Recent route uptime range100.00%66.67% to 100.00%

Modes chat chat

Meta: Llama 3.3 70B Instruct routes

Overview15 endpoints
PricingPrompt and completion rates
BenchmarksTrustedRouter and external sources
ProvidersAll serving providers

Z.ai: GLM 5.1 routes

Overview24 endpoints
PricingPrompt and completion rates
BenchmarksTrustedRouter and external sources
ProvidersAll serving providers

Related comparisons

Browse every comparison

Z.ai: GLM 5.1 vs Z.ai: GLM 5.269 combined provider routes
Meta: Llama 3.3 70B Instruct vs Z.ai: GLM 5.260 combined provider routes
MoonshotAI: Kimi K2.6 vs Z.ai: GLM 5.154 combined provider routes
MoonshotAI: Kimi K3 vs Z.ai: GLM 5.154 combined provider routes
OpenAI: gpt-oss-120b vs Z.ai: GLM 5.149 combined provider routes
DeepSeek: DeepSeek V4 Flash 0423 vs Z.ai: GLM 5.148 combined provider routes
DeepSeek: DeepSeek V4 Pro vs Z.ai: GLM 5.148 combined provider routes
Google: Gemma 4 31B vs Z.ai: GLM 5.147 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-3.3-70b-instruct",
    messages=messages,
)

Questions

Which should I use, Meta: Llama 3.3 70B Instruct or Z.ai: GLM 5.1?

Is Meta: Llama 3.3 70B Instruct or Z.ai: GLM 5.1 cheaper?

The current cheapest TrustedRouter route is $0.56175/1M for Meta: Llama 3.3 70B Instruct and $4.263/1M for Z.ai: GLM 5.1. The comparison uses current catalog prices and updates as provider pricing changes.

Is Meta: Llama 3.3 70B Instruct or Z.ai: GLM 5.1 faster?

Current measured p50 time to first token is 348 ms for Meta: Llama 3.3 70B Instruct and 1249 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 Meta: Llama 3.3 70B Instruct 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 meta-llama/llama-3.3-70b-instruct and z-ai/glm-5.1. This makes side-by-side evals possible without maintaining two provider integrations.