GLM-5.3-Flash vs NVIDIA-Nemotron-3.5-Super-VL-120B-A12B-BF16
Wins 2 of 4 areas
Reasoning · Images and charts
Wins 1 of 4 areas
Agents
GLM-5.3-Flash wins more areas, narrowly.NVIDIA-Nemotron-3.5-Super-VL-120B-A12B-BF16 is better at agents.
Scores updated · 12 tests both models report · How we compare
Where each one wins
Tests won in each of the four 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.
- ReasoningHard problems that need careful thinking20GLM-5.3-Flash2 of 2 tests
- Images and chartsUnderstanding pictures, charts and video10GLM-5.3-Flash1 of 1 test
- AgentsCarrying out multi-step tasks on its own01NVIDIA-Nemotron-3.5-Super-VL-120B-A12B-BF161 of 1 test
- CodingWriting and fixing software11Even1 each
Agents and images and charts 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.
The biggest differences
The tests each model wins by the widest margin, up to three each. Scores are out of 100.
Where GLM-5.3-Flash pulls ahead
- Command-line tasks in a real terminalTerminal-Bench 2.1+23.6points ahead
- Reasoning about charts from research papersCharXiv (RQ)+8.6points ahead
- Research-level physics problemsCritPt+4.5points ahead
Where NVIDIA-Nemotron-3.5-Super-VL-120B-A12B-BF16 pulls ahead
- Completes tasks by operating a computer desktopOSWorld-Verified+36.3points ahead
- Recent programming contest problemsLiveCodeBench v6+7.6points ahead
Every test, side by side
All 12 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
CodingEven
- Terminal-Bench 2.1GLM-5.3-Flash by 23.684.360.7+23.6
- LiveCodeBench v6NVIDIA-Nemotron-3.5-Super-VL-120B-A12B-BF16 by 7.680.688.2+7.6
AgentsNVIDIA-Nemotron-3.5-Super-VL-120B-A12B-BF16
- OSWorld-VerifiedNVIDIA-Nemotron-3.5-Super-VL-120B-A12B-BF16 by 36.314.851.1+36.3
ReasoningGLM-5.3-Flash
- CritPtGLM-5.3-Flash by 4.515.410.9+4.5
- GPQA DiamondGLM-5.3-Flash by 1.791.289.5+1.7
Images and chartsGLM-5.3-Flash
- CharXiv (RQ)GLM-5.3-Flash by 8.689.480.8+8.6
Other results6 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.
- BabyVisionGLM-5.3-Flash by 23.853.429.6+23.8
- Video-MME v2NVIDIA-Nemotron-3.5-Super-VL-120B-A12B-BF16 by 18.114.832.9+18.1
- MMLU-ProXGLM-5.3-Flash by 6.18376.9+6.1
- HLE, text-onlyGLM-5.3-Flash by 4.736.531.8+4.7
- SciCode, subtaskGLM-5.3-Flash by 35047.1+3
- OCRBench v2, ZHNVIDIA-Nemotron-3.5-Super-VL-120B-A12B-BF16 by 2.456.859.1+2.4
Questions people ask
Which is better, GLM-5.3-Flash or NVIDIA-Nemotron-3.5-Super-VL-120B-A12B-BF16?
GLM-5.3-Flash wins two of the four areas where both have results: reasoning and images and charts. NVIDIA-Nemotron-3.5-Super-VL-120B-A12B-BF16 wins agents. They are level on coding.
Which is better for coding?
Neither. They win 1 coding test each of the 2 both models report.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 12 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 6 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 6 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.