The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

GLM-5.3-Flash vs Step-3.5-Flash

GLM-5.3-Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 51.1 to 37.3. Step-3.5-Flash is 1.4x cheaper per token.

Zhipu AI · StepFun · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

GLM-5.3-Flash leads the overall LLM Stats Score 51.1 to 37.3, ranking #12 overall.

On price, Step-3.5-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 GLM-5.3-Flash

  • overall performance matters — it scores 51.1 and ranks #12 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning and coding — it leads those capability indexes
  • you process long inputs — it offers a 1,048,576 token context window
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Aug 2026

Choose Step-3.5-Flash

  • cost matters — it's about 1.4x cheaper per token

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

GLM-5.3-Flash
Zhipu AI
Step-3.5-Flash
StepFun
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
51.1
#12
37.3
#61
Reasoning
49.9
#14
37.3
#62
Coding
36.0
#24
20.4
#88
Agents
37.7
#10
15.3
#74
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
$0.15 / M
$0.10 / M
Output price
$0.50 / M
$0.40 / M
Context window
1,048,576
65,536

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

1 shared
Index
GLM-5.3-Flash
Step-3.5-Flash
Tool use
33.7#3
12.9#93
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

15 reported for GLM-5.3-Flash · 7 for Step-3.5-Flash

No common benchmarks found

GLM-5.3-Flash and Step-3.5-Flashdon't have any common benchmark datasets to compare. They may have been evaluated on different testing suites.

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Step-3.5-Flash costs less

For input processing, GLM-5.3-Flash ($0.15/1M tokens) is 1.5x more expensive than Step-3.5-Flash ($0.10/1M tokens).

For output processing, GLM-5.3-Flash ($0.50/1M tokens) is 1.3x more expensive than Step-3.5-Flash ($0.40/1M tokens).

In conclusion, GLM-5.3-Flash is more expensive than Step-3.5-Flash.*

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

Lowest available price from all providers
Tue Sep 01 2026 • llm-stats.com
Zhipu AI
GLM-5.3-Flash
Input tokens$0.15
Output tokens$0.50
Best providerDeepinfra
StepFun
Step-3.5-Flash
Input tokens$0.10
Output tokens$0.40
Best providerStepFun
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

124.0B diff

GLM-5.3-Flash has 124.0B more parameters than Step-3.5-Flash, making it 63.3% larger.

Zhipu AI
GLM-5.3-Flash
320.0Bparameters
StepFun
Step-3.5-Flash
196.0Bparameters
320.0B
GLM-5.3-Flash
196.0B
Step-3.5-Flash

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

GLM-5.3-Flash accepts 1,048,576 input tokens compared to Step-3.5-Flash's 65,536 tokens. GLM-5.3-Flash can generate longer responses up to 131,072 tokens, while Step-3.5-Flash is limited to 8,192 tokens.

Zhipu AI
GLM-5.3-Flash
Input1,048,576 tokens
Output131,072 tokens
StepFun
Step-3.5-Flash
Input65,536 tokens
Output8,192 tokens
Tue Sep 01 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

GLM-5.3-Flash supports multimodal inputs, whereas Step-3.5-Flash 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

Step-3.5-Flash

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

GLM-5.3-Flash is licensed under MIT, while Step-3.5-Flash 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

Step-3.5-Flash

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

GLM-5.3-Flash was released on 2026-08-26, while Step-3.5-Flash was released on 2026-02-02.

GLM-5.3-Flash is 7 months newer than Step-3.5-Flash.

GLM-5.3-Flash

Aug 26, 2026

5 days ago

6mo newer
Step-3.5-Flash

Feb 2, 2026

7 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

Provider Availability

GLM-5.3-Flash is available from DeepInfra, FriendliAI, Novita, ZAI. Step-3.5-Flash is available from StepFun.

GLM-5.3-Flash

deepinfra logo
Deepinfra
Input Price:Input: $0.15/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.50/1M
friendli logo
FriendliAI
Input Price:Input: $0.15/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.50/1M
novita logo
Novita
Input Price:Input: $0.15/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.50/1M
z logo
Unknown Organization
Input Price:Input: $0.15/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.50/1M

Step-3.5-Flash

stepfun logo
StepFun
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 Step-3.5-Flash side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

GLM-5.3-Flash
✓ Preferred
Step-3.5-Flash
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about GLM-5.3-Flash vs Step-3.5-Flash.

Which is better, GLM-5.3-Flash or Step-3.5-Flash?

GLM-5.3-Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 51.1 to 37.3. GLM-5.3-Flash is made by Zhipu AI and Step-3.5-Flash is made by StepFun. 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 Step-3.5-Flash 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%. Step-3.5-Flash scores AIME 2025: 97.3%, Tau-bench: 88.2%, LiveCodeBench v6: 86.4%, IMO-AnswerBench: 85.4%, SWE-Bench Verified: 74.4%.

Is GLM-5.3-Flash cheaper than Step-3.5-Flash?

Step-3.5-Flash is 1.5x cheaper for input tokens. GLM-5.3-Flash costs $0.15/M input and $0.50/M output via deepinfra. Step-3.5-Flash costs $0.10/M input and $0.40/M output via stepfun.

What are the context window sizes for GLM-5.3-Flash and Step-3.5-Flash?

GLM-5.3-Flash supports 1.0M tokens and Step-3.5-Flash supports 66K 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 Step-3.5-Flash?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (51.1 vs 37.3), context window (1.0M vs 66K), input pricing ($0.15 vs $0.10/M), 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 Step-3.5-Flash?

GLM-5.3-Flash is developed by Zhipu AI and Step-3.5-Flash is developed by StepFun.

Related comparisons