GLM-OCR vs Tesseract
Tesseract is cheaper per page; Tesseract is faster; only GLM-OCR supports tables, math, bounding boxes, confidence.
GLM-OCRzai/glm-ocr | Tesseracttesseract/tesseract | |
|---|---|---|
| Type | Open source | Open source |
| Price | 2 credits / page | Free |
| Per 1,000 pages | $2.00 | $0.00 |
| Typical speed | 1.3 s / page | 0.6 s / page |
| Best for | Low-cost general documents | Clean printed text, free |
| Inputs | PDF, images | PDF, images |
| Languages | 100+ languages | 100+ languages |
| Max pages per request | 500 | 500 |
| Tables | ✓ Yes | No |
| Handwriting | No | No |
| Math | ✓ Yes | No |
| Bounding boxes | ✓ Yes | No |
| Confidence | ✓ Yes | No |
| Forms | No | No |
| Multilingual | ✓ Yes | ✓ Yes |
| On OCRRouter | Available | Available |
Prices are what you pay on OCRRouter. Speed is the provider's typical figure, not a benchmark we ran.
What each one is
Try both on your own file
Run the file once with each model and compare the output.
Resultado
Tu Markdown o JSON aparecerá aquí.
Use one, fall back to the other
Request body
{
"model": "zai/glm-ocr",
"fallbacks": ["tesseract/tesseract"],
"file_url": "https://example.com/document.pdf"
}