The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

GLM-5.3 vs GLM-5.3-Flash

GLM-5.3 shows notably better performance in the majority of benchmarks. GLM-5.3-Flash is 9.1x cheaper per token.

Zhipu AI · Zhipu AI · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

GLM-5.3 outperforms in 5 benchmarks (Agents' Last Exam, DeepSWE 1.1, Humanity's Last Exam, NL2Repo, Terminal-Bench 2.1), while GLM-5.3-Flash is better at 3 benchmarks (AutomationBench, GDPval-AA, Toolathlon). GLM-5.3 shows notably better performance in the majority of benchmarks.

On price, GLM-5.3-Flash is roughly 9.1x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

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

Choose GLM-5.3

  • you want the strongest raw capability — it leads on 5 of 8 shared benchmarks

Choose GLM-5.3-Flash

  • cost matters — it's about 9.1x cheaper per token
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Aug 2026
  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

GLM-5.3
Zhipu AI
GLM-5.3-Flash
Zhipu AI
Benchmark wins
5 of 8
3 of 8
Input price
$1.40 / M
$0.15 / M
Output price
$4.40 / M
$0.50 / M
Context window
1,000,000
1,000,000
Released
Aug 2026
Aug 2026
License
Unknown
MIT

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

8 benchmarks

GLM-5.3 outperforms in 5 benchmarks (Agents' Last Exam, DeepSWE 1.1, Humanity's Last Exam, NL2Repo, Terminal-Bench 2.1), while GLM-5.3-Flash is better at 3 benchmarks (AutomationBench, GDPval-AA, Toolathlon).

GLM-5.3 shows notably better performance in the majority of benchmarks.

Wed Aug 26 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Playground indexes and blind preference scores

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

GLM-5.3-Flash costs less

For input processing, GLM-5.3 ($1.40/1M tokens) is 9.3x more expensive than GLM-5.3-Flash ($0.15/1M tokens).

For output processing, GLM-5.3 ($4.40/1M tokens) is 8.8x more expensive than GLM-5.3-Flash ($0.50/1M tokens).

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

* 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
Input tokens$1.40
Output tokens$4.40
Best providerUnknown Organization
Zhipu AI
GLM-5.3-Flash
Input tokens$0.15
Output tokens$0.50
Best providerUnknown Organization
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

433.0B diff

GLM-5.3 has 433.0B more parameters than GLM-5.3-Flash, making it 135.3% larger.

Zhipu AI
GLM-5.3
753.0Bparameters
Zhipu AI
GLM-5.3-Flash
320.0Bparameters
753.0B
GLM-5.3
320.0B
GLM-5.3-Flash

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Both models have the same input context window of 1,000,000 tokens. Both models can generate responses up to 131,072 tokens.

Zhipu AI
GLM-5.3
Input1,000,000 tokens
Output131,072 tokens
Zhipu AI
GLM-5.3-Flash
Input1,000,000 tokens
Output131,072 tokens
Wed Aug 26 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

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

Text
Images
Audio
Video

GLM-5.3-Flash

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

GLM-5.3 was released on 2026-08-14, while GLM-5.3-Flash was released on 2026-08-26.

GLM-5.3-Flash is 0 month newer than GLM-5.3.

GLM-5.3

Aug 14, 2026

1 weeks ago

GLM-5.3-Flash

Aug 26, 2026

0 days ago

1w newer

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 is available from ZAI. GLM-5.3-Flash is available from ZAI.

GLM-5.3

z logo
Unknown Organization
Input Price:Input: $1.40/1MOutput Price:Output: $4.40/1M

GLM-5.3-Flash

z logo
Unknown Organization
Input Price:Input: $0.15/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.50/1M
* 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 and GLM-5.3-Flash side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

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

FAQ

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

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

GLM-5.3 shows notably better performance in the majority of benchmarks. GLM-5.3 is made by Zhipu AI and GLM-5.3-Flash is made by Zhipu AI. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their benchmark scores, pricing, and capabilities above.

How does GLM-5.3 compare to GLM-5.3-Flash in benchmarks?

GLM-5.3 scores Terminal-Bench 2.1: 88.2%, CyberGym: 84.5%, FrontierSWE: 78.1%, Toolathlon: 73.0%, DeepSWE 1.1: 66.9%. GLM-5.3-Flash scores CharXiv-R: 89.4%, Terminal-Bench 2.1: 84.3%, MMVU: 80.5%, Toolathlon: 78.4%, MVBench: 77.8%.

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

GLM-5.3-Flash is 9.3x cheaper for input tokens. GLM-5.3 costs $1.40/M input and $4.40/M output via z. GLM-5.3-Flash costs $0.15/M input and $0.50/M output via z.

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

GLM-5.3 supports 1.0M tokens and GLM-5.3-Flash 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 and GLM-5.3-Flash?

Key differences include input pricing ($1.40 vs $0.15/M), multimodal support (no vs yes), licensing (Unknown vs MIT). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Related comparisons