DeepSeek-V4-Pro vs GLM-5.3
Wins 1 of 7 areas
Facts
Wins 6 of 7 areas
Coding · Agents · Reasoning · Math · Long documents · Following instructions
GLM-5.3 is the stronger all-rounder.DeepSeek-V4-Pro is cheaper and better at facts.
Scores updated · 42 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.
- CodingWriting and fixing software05GLM-5.35 of 5 tests
- ReasoningHard problems that need careful thinking05GLM-5.35 of 5 tests
- AgentsCarrying out multi-step tasks on its own04GLM-5.34 of 4 tests
- MathCompetition and research-level math12GLM-5.32 of 3 tests
- Long documentsFinding answers in very long texts01GLM-5.31 of 1 test
- Following instructionsDoing exactly what it is asked01GLM-5.31 of 1 test
- FactsGetting facts right instead of making them up21DeepSeek-V4-Pro2 of 3 tests
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-Pro costs 78% less for the same work.
The biggest differences
The three tests each model wins by the widest margin. Scores are out of 100.
Where GLM-5.3 pulls ahead
- Avoids making up answers it doesn't knowAA-Omniscience · Non-hallucination+64.5points ahead
- Complex command-line tasks across many fieldsTerminal-Bench 4.0+27.3points ahead
- Extremely hard research-level math problemsFrontierMath Tier 4+26.9points ahead
Where DeepSeek-V4-Pro pulls ahead
- Answers hard knowledge questions correctlyAA-Omniscience · Accuracy+9.1points ahead
- Short factual questions, answered correctlySimpleQA Verified+5.2points ahead
- Fresh competition math problemsLiveBench · Mathematics+2.8points ahead
Every test, side by side
All 42 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
CodingGLM-5.3
- Terminal-Bench 2.1GLM-5.3 by 19.96483.9+19.9
- LiveBench · Agentic CodingGLM-5.3 by 18.342.660.9+18.3
- LMArena · WebDevGLM-5.3 by 158 rating points14641622+158 rating
- LiveBench · CodingGLM-5.3 by 97079+9
- SciCodeGLM-5.3 by 8.250.859+8.2
AgentsGLM-5.3
- Terminal-Bench 4.0GLM-5.3 by 27.314.641.9+27.3
- GDPValGLM-5.3 by 24.632.957.5+24.6
- τ-Bench V3 · BankingGLM-5.3 by 20.230.150.3+20.2
- AA IT-Bench SREGLM-5.3 by 7.838.346.1+7.8
ReasoningGLM-5.3
- SimpleBenchGLM-5.3 by 15.350.966.2+15.3
- CritPtGLM-5.3 by 6.212.919.1+6.2
- Humanity's Last ExamGLM-5.3 by 4.837.542.3+4.8
- LiveBench · ReasoningGLM-5.3 by 3.182.785.8+3.1
- GPQA DiamondGLM-5.3 by 2.988.891.7+2.9
FactsDeepSeek-V4-Pro
- AA-Omniscience · Non-hallucinationGLM-5.3 by 64.55.970.4+64.5
- AA-Omniscience · AccuracyDeepSeek-V4-Pro by 9.14333.9+9.1
- SimpleQA VerifiedDeepSeek-V4-Pro by 5.246.241+5.2
MathGLM-5.3
- FrontierMath Tier 4GLM-5.3 by 26.92.429.3+26.9
- FrontierMath Tiers 1-3 (v2)GLM-5.3 by 23.545.368.8+23.5
- LiveBench · MathematicsDeepSeek-V4-Pro by 2.890.787.9+2.8
Following instructionsGLM-5.3
- LiveBench · Instruction FollowingGLM-5.3 by 6.962.469.3+6.9
Other results20 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.
- DeepSWEGLM-5.3 by 54.112.866.9+54.1
- GDPval-AA v2GLM-5.3 by 463 rating points13061769+463 rating
- Terminal-Bench 4.0GLM-5.3 by 29.412.441.8+29.4
- Program BenchDeepSeek-V4-Pro by 28.847.819+28.8
- AA Agentic IndexGLM-5.3 by 25.727.753.4+25.7
- AA-OmniscienceGLM-5.3 by 25-10.714.3+25
- ToolathlonGLM-5.3 by 21.251.873+21.2
- NL2RepoGLM-5.3 by 19.538.558+19.5
- Toolathlon VerifiedGLM-5.3 by 17.155.973+17.1
- Terminal-bench 3.0GLM-5.3 by 16.511.828.3+16.5
- Artificial Analysis Coding IndexGLM-5.3 by 15.459.474.8+15.4
- AA IntelligenceGLM-5.3 by 14.430.444.8+14.4
- livebench_data_analysisDeepSeek-V4-Pro by 4.374.570.2+4.3
- DeepSWE v1.1 (Resolved)GLM-5.3 by 4.262.766.9+4.2
- NL2Repo-Bench (Score)DeepSeek-V4-Pro by 3.561.558+3.5
- ProgramBench (Almost@1)GLM-5.3 by 3.515.519+3.5
- Agents' Last ExamGLM-5.3 by 2.825.728.5+2.8
- HLE (with tools)GLM-5.3 by 2.56062.5+2.5
- livebench_languageGLM-5.3 by 1.878.179.9+1.8
- CyberGymGLM-5.3 by 1.283.384.5+1.2
Questions people ask
Which is better, DeepSeek-V4-Pro or GLM-5.3?
GLM-5.3 wins six of the seven areas where both have results: coding, agents, reasoning, math, long documents and following instructions. DeepSeek-V4-Pro wins facts, and costs 78% less.
Which is better for coding?
GLM-5.3. It wins 5 of the 5 coding tests both models report; DeepSeek-V4-Pro wins none.
Which is cheaper?
DeepSeek-V4-Pro costs $0.43 per million input tokens and $0.87 per million output tokens; GLM-5.3 costs $1.40 and $4.40. That makes DeepSeek-V4-Pro about 78% cheaper for the same work.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 42 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 22 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 20 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.