VerdictPal · editorial desk · updated 1 Sep 2026VerdictPal
Compare · Two models, head-to-head

Pick two models. See the diff.

Composite scores, benchmark ranks, capability grids, and pricing per million tokens. All sourced from the same data that powers the model atlas.

GLM-5.3 vs GLM-5.3-Flash

GLM-5.32stats won
Tied1stats
GLM-5.3-Flash4stats won
Spec showdown

Capacity, price, freshness.

GLM-5.3vsGLM-5.3-Flash

GLM-5.3-Flash holds a narrow composite edge (63 vs 54), but the gap is small enough that other factors matter more. GLM-5.3 has the higher Vals/AA intelligence score (60 vs 58). GLM-5.3-Flash is significantly cheaper at $0.15/1M input vs $1.4/1M input. GLM-5.3-Flash's 1M context window dwarfs GLM-5.3's 0 — a meaningful difference for long-document or codebase work.

  1. Composite score
    GLM-5.354GLM-5.3-Flash63Winner on this row
  2. Intelligence (Vals/AA)
    GLM-5.360Winner on this rowGLM-5.3-Flash58
  3. Context window
    GLM-5.3UnlistedGLM-5.3-Flash1MWinner on this row
  4. Max output
    GLM-5.3GLM-5.3-Flash
  5. Input price / 1M (lower wins)
    GLM-5.3$1.4GLM-5.3-Flash$0.15Winner on this row
  6. Output speed (AA default API)
    GLM-5.373 t/sWinner on this rowGLM-5.3-Flash42 t/s
  7. Time to first token (AA default API)
    GLM-5.31.56sGLM-5.3-Flash1.41sWinner on this row
Composite score
54
vs
63Winner on this row
Intelligence (Vals/AA)
60Winner on this row
vs
58
Context window
Unlisted
vs
1MWinner on this row
Max output
vs
Input price / 1M (lower wins)
$1.4
vs
$0.15Winner on this row
Output speed (AA default API)
73 t/sWinner on this row
vs
42 t/s
Time to first token (AA default API)
1.56s
vs
1.41sWinner on this row
Capability grid

What each model can do.

Modalities

GLM-5.3GLM-5.3-Flash
Text
Image
Audio
Video
Code
Tool use
Reasoning

Access

GLM-5.3GLM-5.3-Flash
API
Consumer app
Open weights
Managed cloud
On-device
Family profile

Top score per benchmark family.

Reasoning
92Winner on this row
vs
91
Coding
57Winner on this row
vs
46
Agentic
84
vs
84
Long context
76
vs
78Winner on this row
Benchmark ranks

Every shared benchmark, side by side.

Reasoning

Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index#9/184 · #13/184
59.5%Winner on this row
vs
57.5%
GPQA Diamond#25/185 · #29/185
91.7%Winner on this row
vs
91.2%
Humanity's Last Exam#26/180 · #36/180
42.3%Winner on this row
vs
39.9%

Coding

SciCode#7/180 · #73/180
56.5%Winner on this row
vs
46.1%

Agentic

Terminal-Bench#14/184 · #12/184
83.9%
vs
84.27%Winner on this row
τ³-Bench Banking#3/106 · #6/106
50.31%Winner on this row
vs
47.22%

Long context

AA-LCR#38/179 · #20/179
76.33%
vs
78%Winner on this row

Performance

AA output speed#54/185 · #76/185
73 t/sWinner on this row
vs
42 t/s
AA time to first token#41/185 · #48/185
1.56s
vs
1.41sWinner on this row
Dossier facts

Dates, sources, fineprint.

GLM-5.3GLM-5.3-Flash
ProviderZhipuZhipu
FamilyGLMGLM
Release date2026-08-142026-08-26
Knowledge cutoffunpublishedunpublished
Context windowUnlisted1M
Max output
Input price /1M$1.4$0.15
Output price /1M$4.4$0.50
Statussolidsolid
Composite score5463
Intelligence score6058
Intel sourceaaaa
Benchmark rows119
Source count21
Freshnessfreshfresh
Pricing checked2026-08-242026-09-01
Ecosystem

Which tools wrap each model.

GLM-5.3

Not listed in any tool yet.

GLM-5.3-Flash

Not listed in any tool yet.

Verdict

Which model to actually pick.

GLM-5.3-Flash holds a narrow composite edge (63 vs 54), but the gap is small enough that other factors matter more. GLM-5.3 has the higher Vals/AA intelligence score (60 vs 58). GLM-5.3-Flash is significantly cheaper at $0.15/1M input vs $1.4/1M input. GLM-5.3-Flash's 1M context window dwarfs GLM-5.3's 0 — a meaningful difference for long-document or codebase work.