DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash vs GLM-5.3-Flash
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash and GLM-5.3-Flash are closely matched at 51.8 and 50.2 on the LLM Stats Score. GLM-5.3-Flash is 1.4x cheaper per token.
DeepSeek · Zhipu AI · Updated for 2026
Which is better?
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash and GLM-5.3-Flash are closely matched on the overall LLM Stats Score at 51.8 and 50.2.
In the 8 individual benchmarks reported for both models, DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash wins 7; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.
On price, GLM-5.3-Flash is roughly 1.4x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.
GLM-5.3-Flash also accepts a larger context window (1,048,576 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.
Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.
Choose DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash
- you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 7 of 8 exact shared results
- you want the most recent training data — it shipped Sep 2026
Choose GLM-5.3-Flash
- cost matters — it's about 1.4x cheaper per token
- you process long inputs — it offers a 1,048,576 token context window
At a glance
The differences that matter most.
Capability indexes
Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks
Individual benchmarks
20 reported for DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash · 15 for GLM-5.3-Flash
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash outperforms in 7 benchmarks (Agents' Last Exam, AutomationBench, BabyVision, Chartography, DeepSWE 1.1, NL2Repo, Terminal-Bench 2.1), while GLM-5.3-Flash is better at 1 benchmark (Humanity's Last Exam).
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.
Human preference
Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores
Pricing Analysis
Price comparison per million tokens
For input processing, DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash ($0.22/1M tokens) is 1.5x more expensive than GLM-5.3-Flash ($0.15/1M tokens).
For output processing, DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash ($0.66/1M tokens) is 1.3x more expensive than GLM-5.3-Flash ($0.50/1M tokens).
In conclusion, DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash is more expensive than GLM-5.3-Flash.*
* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens
Model Size
Parameter count comparison
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash has 443.2B more parameters than GLM-5.3-Flash, making it 138.5% larger.
Context Window
Maximum input and output token capacity
GLM-5.3-Flash accepts 1,048,576 input tokens compared to DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash's 1,040,000 tokens. GLM-5.3-Flash can generate longer responses up to 1,048,576 tokens, while DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash is limited to 393,216 tokens.
Input capabilities
Documented input modalities across available providers
Both DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash and GLM-5.3-Flash support multimodal inputs.
They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash
GLM-5.3-Flash
License
Usage and distribution terms
Both models are licensed under MIT.
Both models share the same licensing terms, providing consistent usage rights.
MIT
Open weights
MIT
Open weights
Release Timeline
When each model was launched
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash was released on 2026-09-10, while GLM-5.3-Flash was released on 2026-08-26.
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash is 1 month newer than GLM-5.3-Flash.
Sep 10, 2026
1 weeks ago
2w newerAug 26, 2026
3 weeks ago
Knowledge Cutoff
When training data ends
Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.
Unable to compare the recency of their training data.
Provider Availability
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash is available from Fireworks, DeepInfra, DeepSeek, Novita. GLM-5.3-Flash is available from DeepInfra, FriendliAI, Novita, ZAI.
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash
GLM-5.3-Flash
Outputs Comparison
Judge for yourself.
Run your own prompts against DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash and GLM-5.3-Flash side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.
FAQ
Common questions about DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash vs GLM-5.3-Flash.