GLM-5.3-Flash vs Qwen3.5 397B A17B
Wins 7 of 7 areas
Coding · Agents · Reasoning · Facts · Images and charts · Math · Long documents
Wins 0 of 7 areas
—
GLM-5.3-Flash is the stronger all-rounder.
Scores updated · 27 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.
- AgentsCarrying out multi-step tasks on its own50GLM-5.3-Flash5 of 5 tests
- ReasoningHard problems that need careful thinking30GLM-5.3-Flash3 of 3 tests
- CodingWriting and fixing software31GLM-5.3-Flash3 of 4 tests
- FactsGetting facts right instead of making them up21GLM-5.3-Flash2 of 3 tests
- Images and chartsUnderstanding pictures, charts and video10GLM-5.3-Flash1 of 1 test
- MathCompetition and research-level math10GLM-5.3-Flash1 of 1 test
- Long documentsFinding answers in very long texts10GLM-5.3-Flash1 of 1 test
Images and charts, math and long documents 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.
GLM-5.3-Flash costs 85% less for the same work.
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
- Avoids making up answers it doesn't knowAA-Omniscience · Non-hallucination+61.3points ahead
- Real work tasks from 44 professionsGDPVal+42.6points ahead
- Customer-service tasks in a simulated bankτ-Bench V3 · Banking+33.8points ahead
Where Qwen3.5 397B A17B pulls ahead
- Answers hard knowledge questions correctlyAA-Omniscience · Accuracy+3.3points ahead
- Recent programming contest problemsLiveCodeBench v6+3points ahead
Every test, side by side
All 27 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
CodingGLM-5.3-Flash
- Terminal-Bench 2.1GLM-5.3-Flash by 3384.351.3+33
- LMArena · WebDevGLM-5.3-Flash by 209 rating points16091400+209 rating
- SciCodeGLM-5.3-Flash by 6.851.644.8+6.8
- LiveCodeBench v6Qwen3.5 397B A17B by 380.683.6+3
AgentsGLM-5.3-Flash
- GDPValGLM-5.3-Flash by 42.657.214.6+42.6
- τ-Bench V3 · BankingGLM-5.3-Flash by 33.847.213.4+33.8
- Terminal-Bench 4.0GLM-5.3-Flash by 32.832.80+32.8
- AA IT-Bench SREGLM-5.3-Flash by 17.151.234.1+17.1
- BrowseCompGLM-5.3-Flash by 77669+7
ReasoningGLM-5.3-Flash
- CritPtGLM-5.3-Flash by 13.715.41.7+13.7
- Humanity's Last ExamGLM-5.3-Flash by 10.939.929+10.9
- GPQA DiamondGLM-5.3-Flash by 1.991.289.3+1.9
FactsGLM-5.3-Flash
- AA-Omniscience · Non-hallucinationGLM-5.3-Flash by 61.372.411.1+61.3
- SimpleQA VerifiedGLM-5.3-Flash by 63226+6
- AA-Omniscience · AccuracyQwen3.5 397B A17B by 3.327.530.8+3.3
Images and chartsGLM-5.3-Flash
- LMArena · VisionGLM-5.3-Flash by 33 rating points12951262+33 rating
Other results9 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.
- AA Agentic IndexGLM-5.3-Flash by 40.651.210.6+40.6
- ToolathlonGLM-5.3-Flash by 40.178.438.3+40.1
- AA-OmniscienceGLM-5.3-Flash by 38.27.5-30.8+38.2
- NL2RepoGLM-5.3-Flash by 24.156.332.2+24.1
- AA IntelligenceGLM-5.3-Flash by 23.441.818.4+23.4
- Artificial Analysis Coding IndexGLM-5.3-Flash by 23.371.548.2+23.3
- HLE-DiamondGLM-5.3-Flash by 5.818.212.4+5.8
- GDP (Surge AI)GLM-5.3-Flash by 3.215.412.2+3.2
- MMLU-ProXQwen3.5 397B A17B by 1.78384.7+1.7
Questions people ask
Which is better, GLM-5.3-Flash or Qwen3.5 397B A17B?
GLM-5.3-Flash wins all seven areas where both have results: coding, agents, reasoning, facts, images and charts, math and long documents. Qwen3.5 397B A17B wins none.
Which is better for coding?
GLM-5.3-Flash. It wins 3 of the 4 coding tests both models report; Qwen3.5 397B A17B wins 1.
Which is cheaper?
GLM-5.3-Flash costs $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.50 per million output tokens; Qwen3.5 397B A17B costs $0.60 and $3.60. That makes GLM-5.3-Flash about 85% cheaper for the same work.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 27 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 18 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 9 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.