DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash vs GLM-5.3
Wins 5 of 7 areas
Coding · Reasoning · Facts · Math · Long documents
Wins 1 of 7 areas
Agents
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash is the stronger all-rounder.GLM-5.3 is better at agents.
Scores updated · 48 tests both models report · How we compare
Where each one wins
Tests won in each of the seven areas where both have results. Each piece is one test, so a longer bar means more evidence; grey means the two scored within a point of each other.
- MathCompetition and research-level math30DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash3 of 3 tests
- CodingWriting and fixing software31DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash3 of 5 tests · 1 tie
- ReasoningHard problems that need careful thinking20DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash2 of 5 tests · 3 ties
- FactsGetting facts right instead of making them up21DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash2 of 3 tests
- Long documentsFinding answers in very long texts10DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash1 of 1 test
- AgentsCarrying out multi-step tasks on its own02GLM-5.32 of 3 tests · 1 tie
- Following instructionsDoing exactly what it is asked00Even0 each · 1 tie
Long documents and following instructions rest on a single test each.
What it costs
Prices per million tokens, roughly 750,000 words. The bars show the cost of a million tokens read plus a million written.
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash costs 74% less for the same work.
The biggest differences
The three tests each model wins by the widest margin. Scores are out of 100.
Where DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash pulls ahead
- Extremely hard research-level math problemsFrontierMath Tier 4+17points ahead
- Fixes real GitHub issues, working as an agentLiveBench · Agentic Coding+16.4points ahead
- Answers hard knowledge questions correctlyAA-Omniscience · Accuracy+12.5points ahead
Where GLM-5.3 pulls ahead
- Avoids making up answers it doesn't knowAA-Omniscience · Non-hallucination+66.9points ahead
- Complex command-line tasks across many fieldsTerminal-Bench 4.0+8.1points ahead
- Code for real scientific research problemsSciCode+3.1points ahead
Every test, side by side
All 48 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
CodingDeepSeek-V4.1-Flash
- LiveBench · Agentic CodingDeepSeek-V4.1-Flash by 16.477.360.9+16.4
- Terminal-Bench 2.1DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash by 6.790.683.9+6.7
- SciCodeGLM-5.3 by 3.155.959+3.1
- LiveBench · CodingDeepSeek-V4.1-Flash by 18079+1
- LMArena · WebDevtie16211622tie
AgentsGLM-5.3
- Terminal-Bench 4.0GLM-5.3 by 8.133.841.9+8.1
- GDPValGLM-5.3 by 2.55557.5+2.5
- AA IT-Bench SREtie46.946.1tie
ReasoningDeepSeek-V4.1-Flash
- CritPtDeepSeek-V4.1-Flash by 4.92419.1+4.9
- Humanity's Last ExamDeepSeek-V4.1-Flash by 143.342.3+1
- LiveBench · Reasoningtie86.785.8tie
- GPQA Diamondtie90.991.7tie
- SimpleBenchtie66.766.2tie
FactsDeepSeek-V4.1-Flash
- AA-Omniscience · Non-hallucinationGLM-5.3 by 66.93.570.4+66.9
- AA-Omniscience · AccuracyDeepSeek-V4.1-Flash by 12.546.433.9+12.5
- SimpleQA VerifiedDeepSeek-V4.1-Flash by 1.942.941+1.9
MathDeepSeek-V4.1-Flash
- FrontierMath Tier 4DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash by 1746.329.3+17
- LiveBench · MathematicsDeepSeek-V4.1-Flash by 5.493.387.9+5.4
- FrontierMath Tiers 1-3 (v2)DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash by 2.471.268.8+2.4
Long documentsDeepSeek-V4.1-Flash
- AA-LCRDeepSeek-V4.1-Flash by 382.779.7+3
Following instructionsEven
- LiveBench · Instruction Followingtie7069.3tie
Other results27 tests, not counted
Tests outside the eight areas. They are not counted above: several are summary scores built from other tests, or the same test under another name.
- CyberGym-E2E-AADeepSeek-V4.1-Flash by 47.376.329+47.3
- AA-OmniscienceGLM-5.3 by 19.6-5.314.3+19.6
- JailbreakBench (cyber subset): safe-response rateDeepSeek-V4.1-Flash by 13.594.681.1+13.5
- Terminal-Bench 4.0GLM-5.3 by 10.631.241.8+10.6
- CritPt v2 (Hard Subset)GLM-5.3 by 9.52433.5+9.5
- livebench_data_analysisDeepSeek-V4.1-Flash by 9.179.370.2+9.1
- Terminal-Bench 4.0 (AA Coding Agent Index)GLM-5.3 by 93140+9
- CritPt v2 HardGLM-5.3 by 8.52533.5+8.5
- AgentHarm (cyber subset): 100 minus harm scoreDeepSeek-V4.1-Flash by 7.810092.2+7.8
- HLE-DiamondDeepSeek-V4.1-Flash by 7.425.317.9+7.4
- DeepSWE 1.1DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash by 7.374.266.9+7.3
- PostTrain Bench v1.1GLM-5.3 by 730.537.5+7
- GDP (Surge AI)DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash by 617.211.2+6
- NL2RepoDeepSeek-V4.1-Flash by 66458+6
- AA IntelligenceGLM-5.3 by 5.339.544.8+5.3
- PostTrain Bench v1.2GLM-5.3 by 430.534.5+4
- CyberGymDeepSeek-V4.1-Flash by 3.688.184.5+3.6
- Terminal-Bench-Science 0.1DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash by 3.412.99.5+3.4
- Agents' Last ExamDeepSeek-V4.1-Flash by 3.331.828.5+3.3
- SWE Marathon v1.1GLM-5.3 by 2.54042.5+2.5
- Terminal-bench 3.0DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash by 1.73028.3+1.7
- HLE (with tools)DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash by 1.463.962.5+1.4
- SWE Refactor BenchDeepSeek-V4.1-Flash by 1.411.810.4+1.4
- livebench_languageDeepSeek-V4.1-Flash by 1.381.279.9+1.3
- Program BenchDeepSeek-V4.1-Flash by 1.320.319+1.3
- BeyondAIMEtie90.690.6tie
- StrongREJECT (cyber subset): refusal ratetie8787tie
Questions people ask
Which is better, DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash or GLM-5.3?
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash wins five of the seven areas where both have results: coding, reasoning, facts, math and long documents. GLM-5.3 wins agents. They are level on following instructions.
Which is better for coding?
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash. It wins 3 of the 5 coding tests both models report; GLM-5.3 wins 1, and 1 is a tie.
Which is cheaper?
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash costs $0.30 per million input tokens and $1.20 per million output tokens; GLM-5.3 costs $1.40 and $4.40. That makes DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash about 74% cheaper for the same work.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 48 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 21 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 27 are listed but not counted, because several are summary scores or repeat a test. Each score is the one shown on the model's own page.