The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

GLM-5.3-Flash vs Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct

Comparing GLM-5.3-Flash and Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct across benchmarks, pricing, and capabilities.

Zhipu AI · NVIDIA · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

GLM-5.3-Flash and Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct trade strengths across price, capabilities, and technical limits. The better choice depends on the workload.

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

Choose GLM-5.3-Flash

  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Aug 2026

Choose Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct

  • you are already invested in the NVIDIA ecosystem

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

GLM-5.3-Flash
Zhipu AI
Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct
NVIDIA
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
$0.15 / M
— / M
Output price
$0.50 / M
— / M
Context window
1,048,576
—
Released
Aug 2026
Oct 2024
License
MIT
Llama 3.1 Community License

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

No common benchmarks found

GLM-5.3-Flash and Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instructdon't have any common benchmark datasets to compare. They may have been evaluated on different testing suites.

Arena Performance

Playground indexes and blind preference scores

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

250.0B diff

GLM-5.3-Flash has 250.0B more parameters than Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct, making it 357.1% larger.

Zhipu AI
GLM-5.3-Flash
320.0Bparameters
NVIDIA
Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct
70.0Bparameters
320.0B
GLM-5.3-Flash
70.0B
Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only GLM-5.3-Flash specifies input context (1,048,576 tokens). Only GLM-5.3-Flash specifies output context (131,072 tokens).

Zhipu AI
GLM-5.3-Flash
Input1,048,576 tokens
Output131,072 tokens
NVIDIA
Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Thu Aug 27 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

GLM-5.3-Flash supports multimodal inputs, whereas Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct does not.

GLM-5.3-Flash can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

GLM-5.3-Flash

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

GLM-5.3-Flash is licensed under MIT, while Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct uses Llama 3.1 Community License.

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

GLM-5.3-Flash

MIT

Open weights

Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct

Llama 3.1 Community License

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

GLM-5.3-Flash was released on 2026-08-26, while Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct was released on 2024-10-01.

GLM-5.3-Flash is 23 months newer than Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct.

GLM-5.3-Flash

Aug 26, 2026

0 days ago

1.9yr newer
Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct

Oct 1, 2024

1.9 years ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2023-12-01, while GLM-5.3-Flash's cutoff date is not specified.

We can confirm Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct's training data extends to 2023-12-01, but cannot make a direct comparison without GLM-5.3-Flash's cutoff date.

GLM-5.3-Flash

—

Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct

Dec 2023

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against GLM-5.3-Flash and Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

GLM-5.3-Flash
✓ Preferred
Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about GLM-5.3-Flash vs Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct.

Which is better, GLM-5.3-Flash or Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct?

GLM-5.3-Flash (Zhipu AI) and Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct (NVIDIA) each have strengths in different areas. Compare their benchmark scores, pricing, context windows, and capabilities above to determine which fits your needs.

How does GLM-5.3-Flash compare to Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct in benchmarks?

GLM-5.3-Flash scores CharXiv-R: 89.4%, Terminal-Bench 2.1: 84.3%, MMVU: 80.5%, Toolathlon: 78.4%, Chartography: 78.0%. Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct scores GSM8k: 91.4%, HellaSwag: 85.6%, Winogrande: 84.5%, GSM8K Chat: 81.9%, MMLU Chat: 80.6%.

What are the context window sizes for GLM-5.3-Flash and Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct?

GLM-5.3-Flash supports 1.0M tokens and Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct supports an unknown number of 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 Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct?

Key differences include multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (MIT vs Llama 3.1 Community License). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes GLM-5.3-Flash and Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct?

GLM-5.3-Flash is developed by Zhipu AI and Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct is developed by NVIDIA.

Related comparisons