Step3 VL 10B is the stronger all-rounder.
Scores updated · 15 tests both models report · How we compare
Where each one wins
Tests won in each of the one area 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.
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.
The biggest differences
The tests each model wins by the widest margin, up to three each. Scores are out of 100.
Every test, side by side
All 15 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
Images and chartsStep3 VL 10B
Other results10 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.
- HumanEval-VStep3 VL 10B by 36.829.366+36.8
- MATH-VisionStep3 VL 10B by 16.75470.8+16.7
- PhyXStep3 VL 10B by 7.252.359.5+7.2
- ReMIStep3 VL 10B by 6.560.867.3+6.5
- ScreenSpot-Pro (No tools)Step3 VL 10B by 5.945.751.5+5.9
- OSWorld-GStep3 VL 10B by 4.354.759+4.3
- All-Angles-BenchStep3 VL 10B by 453.257.2+4
- MMBench (EN)Step3 VL 10B by 1.49192.4+1.4
- AI2Dtie88.989.3tie
- ScreenSpot-V2tie92.192.6tie
Questions people ask
Which is better, GLM-4.6V-Flash (9B) or Step3 VL 10B?
Step3 VL 10B wins the one area where both have results: images and charts. GLM-4.6V-Flash (9B) wins none.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 15 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 5 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 10 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.