The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

GLM-5.3-Flash vs Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B v1

Comparing GLM-5.3-Flash and Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B v1 across benchmarks, pricing, and capabilities.

Zhipu AI · NVIDIA · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

GLM-5.3-Flash and Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B v1 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 Ultra 253B v1

  • 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 Ultra 253B v1
NVIDIA
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
$0.15 / M
— / M
Output price
$0.50 / M
— / M
Context window
1,000,000
—
Released
Aug 2026
Apr 2025
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 Ultra 253B v1don'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

67.0B diff

GLM-5.3-Flash has 67.0B more parameters than Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B v1, making it 26.5% larger.

Zhipu AI
GLM-5.3-Flash
320.0Bparameters
NVIDIA
Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B v1
253.0Bparameters
320.0B
GLM-5.3-Flash
253.0B
Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B v1

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only GLM-5.3-Flash specifies input context (1,000,000 tokens). Only GLM-5.3-Flash specifies output context (131,072 tokens).

Zhipu AI
GLM-5.3-Flash
Input1,000,000 tokens
Output131,072 tokens
NVIDIA
Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B v1
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Wed Aug 26 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

GLM-5.3-Flash supports multimodal inputs, whereas Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B v1 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 Ultra 253B v1

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

GLM-5.3-Flash is licensed under MIT, while Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B v1 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 Ultra 253B v1

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 Ultra 253B v1 was released on 2025-04-07.

GLM-5.3-Flash is 17 months newer than Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B v1.

GLM-5.3-Flash

Aug 26, 2026

0 days ago

1.4yr newer
Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B v1

Apr 7, 2025

1.4 years ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B v1 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 Ultra 253B v1'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 Ultra 253B v1

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 Ultra 253B v1 side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

GLM-5.3-Flash
✓ Preferred
Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B v1
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about GLM-5.3-Flash vs Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B v1.

Which is better, GLM-5.3-Flash or Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B v1?

GLM-5.3-Flash (Zhipu AI) and Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B v1 (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 Ultra 253B v1 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%. Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B v1 scores MATH-500: 97.0%, IFEval: 89.5%, GPQA: 76.0%, BFCL v2: 74.1%, AIME 2025: 72.5%.

What are the context window sizes for GLM-5.3-Flash and Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B v1?

GLM-5.3-Flash supports 1.0M tokens and Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B v1 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 Ultra 253B v1?

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 Ultra 253B v1?

GLM-5.3-Flash is developed by Zhipu AI and Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B v1 is developed by NVIDIA.

Related comparisons