Head-to-head
HunyuanImage 3.0 vs GLM-Image
A 3.7-point composite gap — but the real story is the dimension mix. Same weights, unpacked: who leads where, and whether the premium is justified.
The short answer
The composites differ by 3.7 points, and their strengths do not overlap.
Stronger overall: HunyuanImage 3.0. If you only run one workload, read the dimension table instead.
Overlaid radar
Same weights, same scale; overlap means parity
- HunyuanImage 3.074.3
- GLM-Image70.6
Dimension deltas
A on the left, B on the right; 100 max per row
HunyuanImage 3.0 leads 7, GLM-Image leads 1.
Spec sheet
Hard specs in one table
| Item | HunyuanImage 3.0 | GLM-Image |
|---|---|---|
| Composite | 74.3 | 70.6 |
| Tier | B | B |
| Visual perception & grounding | 88WIN | 84 |
| Document parsing & Chinese OCR | 82WIN | 78 |
| Chart & document reasoning | 70WIN | 65 |
| Video & long-horizon reasoning | 60WIN | 55 |
| GUI agents & tool use | 40WIN | 35 |
| Generation & editing | 96WIN | 94 |
| Chinese context & culture | 92WIN | 90 |
| Ecosystem, cost & availability | 86 | 88WIN |
| Output price | ¥0 / M | ¥0 / M |
| Context | 32K | 32K |
| Parameters | 80B total (MoE) | Undisclosed (MoE, full Ascend stack) |
| Licence | Open weights (Tencent Hunyuan community licence) | Open weights (Zhipu community licence) |
| Native multimodal | Yes | Yes |
| Evidence grade | B | B |
How to choose
Choose HunyuanImage 3.0 if…
- Chinese posters and brand visuals
- E-commerce hero images and detail pages
- Chinese typography rendering
- You cannot accept its limitation: Agents 40 and video 60: it neither understands nor acts, it only generates.
How to choose
Choose GLM-Image if…
- Image generation in domestic-chip environments
- Chinese posters and product images
- Creative tooling inside the Ascend ecosystem
- You cannot accept its limitation: Average understanding: documents 78, charts 65.
Scenario check
Five scenarios, who holds up
| Scenario | HunyuanImage 3.0 | GLM-Image | Better |
|---|---|---|---|
| Chinese poster generation | 96 | 94 | HunyuanImage 3.0 |
| Product-image generation | 92 | 90 | HunyuanImage 3.0 |
| Chinese receipt OCR | 82 | 78 | HunyuanImage 3.0 |
| 30-min video QA | 60 | 55 | HunyuanImage 3.0 |
| Chinese cultural context | 92 | 90 | HunyuanImage 3.0 |
Comparison FAQ
HunyuanImage 3.0 vs GLM-Image: which is stronger?
Composite: HunyuanImage 3.0 74.3, GLM-Image 70.6. HunyuanImage 3.0 leads on Visual perception & grounding, Document parsing & Chinese OCR, Chart & document reasoning, Video & long-horizon reasoning, GUI agents & tool use, Generation & editing, Chinese context & culture; GLM-Image leads on Ecosystem, cost & availability. The stronger overall is HunyuanImage 3.0.
How much more expensive is HunyuanImage 3.0 than GLM-Image?
HunyuanImage 3.0 is ¥0/1M output tokens; GLM-Image is ¥0/1M. On output price, HunyuanImage 3.0 is pricier; real cost also depends on image tokens and input share.
Can GLM-Image replace HunyuanImage 3.0?
It depends on your primary workload. If it sits in GLM-Image’s strengths (Image generation in domestic-chip environments, Chinese posters and product images, Creative tooling inside the Ascend ecosystem), yes. If you need Chinese posters and brand visuals, switching will cost quality.
Personal ranking · Not an official score
Every ranking, score and comparison on this page is an independent personal ranking, not an official score, and represents no vendor, institution or regulator. Scores are a subjective mapping of public evidence under our own weights — change the weights and the order changes. Disagree, or spotted a factual error? Contact the site owner: jizhi2024@foxmail.com — we check each report and log corrections in the changelog.