The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

GLM-5.3-Flash vs GPT-4.1 nano

GLM-5.3-Flash significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. GPT-4.1 nano is 1.4x cheaper per token.

Zhipu AI · OpenAI · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

GLM-5.3-Flash outperforms in 1 benchmarks (CharXiv-R), while GPT-4.1 nano is better at 0 benchmarks. GLM-5.3-Flash significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

On price, GPT-4.1 nano is roughly 1.4x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

GPT-4.1 nano also accepts a larger context window (1,047,576 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.

Based on current benchmark, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose GLM-5.3-Flash

  • you want the strongest raw capability — it leads on 1 of 1 shared benchmarks
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Aug 2026
  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

Choose GPT-4.1 nano

  • cost matters — it's about 1.4x cheaper per token
  • you process long inputs — it offers a 1,047,576 token context window

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Benchmark wins
1 of 1
0 of 1
Input price
$0.15 / M
$0.10 / M
Output price
$0.50 / M
$0.40 / M
Context window
1,000,000
1,047,576
Released
Aug 2026
Apr 2025
License
MIT
Proprietary

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

1 benchmarks

GLM-5.3-Flash outperforms in 1 benchmarks (CharXiv-R), while GPT-4.1 nano is better at 0 benchmarks.

GLM-5.3-Flash significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Wed Aug 26 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Playground indexes and blind preference scores

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

GPT-4.1 nano costs less

For input processing, GLM-5.3-Flash ($0.15/1M tokens) is 1.5x more expensive than GPT-4.1 nano ($0.10/1M tokens).

For output processing, GLM-5.3-Flash ($0.50/1M tokens) is 1.3x more expensive than GPT-4.1 nano ($0.40/1M tokens).

In conclusion, GLM-5.3-Flash is more expensive than GPT-4.1 nano.*

* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens

Lowest available price from all providers
Wed Aug 26 2026 • llm-stats.com
Zhipu AI
GLM-5.3-Flash
Input tokens$0.15
Output tokens$0.50
Best providerUnknown Organization
OpenAI
GPT-4.1 nano
Input tokens$0.10
Output tokens$0.40
Best providerOpenAI
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

GPT-4.1 nano accepts 1,047,576 input tokens compared to GLM-5.3-Flash's 1,000,000 tokens. GLM-5.3-Flash can generate longer responses up to 131,072 tokens, while GPT-4.1 nano is limited to 32,768 tokens.

Zhipu AI
GLM-5.3-Flash
Input1,000,000 tokens
Output131,072 tokens
OpenAI
GPT-4.1 nano
Input1,047,576 tokens
Output32,768 tokens
Wed Aug 26 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

Both GLM-5.3-Flash and GPT-4.1 nano support multimodal inputs.

They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.

GLM-5.3-Flash

Text
Images
Audio
Video

GPT-4.1 nano

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

GLM-5.3-Flash is licensed under MIT, while GPT-4.1 nano uses a proprietary license.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

GLM-5.3-Flash

MIT

Open weights

GPT-4.1 nano

Proprietary

Closed source

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

GLM-5.3-Flash was released on 2026-08-26, while GPT-4.1 nano was released on 2025-04-14.

GLM-5.3-Flash is 17 months newer than GPT-4.1 nano.

GLM-5.3-Flash

Aug 26, 2026

0 days ago

1.4yr newer
GPT-4.1 nano

Apr 14, 2025

1.4 years ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

GPT-4.1 nano has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2024-05-31, while GLM-5.3-Flash's cutoff date is not specified.

We can confirm GPT-4.1 nano's training data extends to 2024-05-31, but cannot make a direct comparison without GLM-5.3-Flash's cutoff date.

GLM-5.3-Flash

GPT-4.1 nano

May 2024

Provider Availability

GLM-5.3-Flash is available from ZAI. GPT-4.1 nano is available from OpenAI.

GLM-5.3-Flash

z logo
Unknown Organization
Input Price:Input: $0.15/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.50/1M

GPT-4.1 nano

openai logo
OpenAI
Input Price:Input: $0.10/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.40/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against GLM-5.3-Flash and GPT-4.1 nano side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

GLM-5.3-Flash
✓ Preferred
GPT-4.1 nano
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about GLM-5.3-Flash vs GPT-4.1 nano.

Which is better, GLM-5.3-Flash or GPT-4.1 nano?

GLM-5.3-Flash significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. GLM-5.3-Flash is made by Zhipu AI and GPT-4.1 nano is made by OpenAI. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their benchmark scores, pricing, and capabilities above.

How does GLM-5.3-Flash compare to GPT-4.1 nano in benchmarks?

GLM-5.3-Flash scores CharXiv-R: 89.4%, Terminal-Bench 2.1: 84.3%, MMVU: 80.5%, Toolathlon: 78.4%, MVBench: 77.8%. GPT-4.1 nano scores MMLU: 80.1%, IFEval: 74.5%, CharXiv-D: 73.9%, MMMLU: 66.9%, Multi-IF: 57.2%.

Is GLM-5.3-Flash cheaper than GPT-4.1 nano?

GPT-4.1 nano is 1.5x cheaper for input tokens. GLM-5.3-Flash costs $0.15/M input and $0.50/M output via z. GPT-4.1 nano costs $0.10/M input and $0.40/M output via openai.

What are the context window sizes for GLM-5.3-Flash and GPT-4.1 nano?

GLM-5.3-Flash supports 1.0M tokens and GPT-4.1 nano supports 1.0M tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between GLM-5.3-Flash and GPT-4.1 nano?

Key differences include context window (1.0M vs 1.0M), input pricing ($0.15 vs $0.10/M), licensing (MIT vs Proprietary). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes GLM-5.3-Flash and GPT-4.1 nano?

GLM-5.3-Flash is developed by Zhipu AI and GPT-4.1 nano is developed by OpenAI.