The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

GLM-5.3-Flash vs Sarvam-105B

GLM-5.3-Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 51.6 to 26.1.

Zhipu AI · Sarvam AI · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

GLM-5.3-Flash leads the overall LLM Stats Score 51.6 to 26.1, ranking #11 overall.

In the 1 individual benchmarks reported for both models, GLM-5.3-Flash wins 1; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.

Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose GLM-5.3-Flash

  • overall performance matters — it scores 51.6 and ranks #11 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning and coding — it leads those capability indexes
  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 1 of 1 exact shared results
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Aug 2026

Choose Sarvam-105B

  • you are already invested in the Sarvam AI ecosystem

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Core performance indexes
51.6
#11
26.1
#137
50.3
#13
26.6
#133
37.8
#22
-1.0
#229
39.1
#9
6.3
#126
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
1 of 1
0 of 1
Input price
$0.15 / M
— / M
Output price
$0.50 / M
— / M
Context window
1,048,576

Individual benchmarks

15 reported for GLM-5.3-Flash · 14 for Sarvam-105B

1 shared

GLM-5.3-Flash outperforms in 1 benchmarks (Humanity's Last Exam), while Sarvam-105B is better at 0 benchmarks.

GLM-5.3-Flash significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Sat Aug 29 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

215.0B diff

GLM-5.3-Flash has 215.0B more parameters than Sarvam-105B, making it 204.8% larger.

Zhipu AI
GLM-5.3-Flash
320.0Bparameters
Sarvam AI
Sarvam-105B
105.0Bparameters
320.0B
GLM-5.3-Flash
105.0B
Sarvam-105B

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
Sarvam AI
Sarvam-105B
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Sat Aug 29 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

GLM-5.3-Flash supports multimodal inputs, whereas Sarvam-105B 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

Sarvam-105B

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

GLM-5.3-Flash is licensed under MIT, while Sarvam-105B uses Apache 2.0.

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

GLM-5.3-Flash

MIT

Open weights

Sarvam-105B

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

GLM-5.3-Flash was released on 2026-08-26, while Sarvam-105B was released on 2026-03-06.

GLM-5.3-Flash is 6 months newer than Sarvam-105B.

GLM-5.3-Flash

Aug 26, 2026

3 days ago

5mo newer
Sarvam-105B

Mar 6, 2026

5 months ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.

Unable to compare the recency of their training data.

No cutoff dates available

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against GLM-5.3-Flash and Sarvam-105B side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

GLM-5.3-Flash
✓ Preferred
Sarvam-105B
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about GLM-5.3-Flash vs Sarvam-105B.

Which is better, GLM-5.3-Flash or Sarvam-105B?

GLM-5.3-Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 51.6 to 26.1. GLM-5.3-Flash is made by Zhipu AI and Sarvam-105B is made by Sarvam AI. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does GLM-5.3-Flash compare to Sarvam-105B 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%. Sarvam-105B scores MATH-500: 98.6%, AIME 2025: 96.7%, MMLU: 90.6%, HMMT 2025: 85.8%, HMMT25: 85.8%.

What are the context window sizes for GLM-5.3-Flash and Sarvam-105B?

GLM-5.3-Flash supports 1.0M tokens and Sarvam-105B 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 Sarvam-105B?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (51.6 vs 26.1), multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (MIT vs Apache 2.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes GLM-5.3-Flash and Sarvam-105B?

GLM-5.3-Flash is developed by Zhipu AI and Sarvam-105B is developed by Sarvam AI.