GLM-5.3-Flash vs Qwen3.8 Flash Next
Wins 2 of 8 areas
Agents · Facts
Wins 4 of 8 areas
Coding · Images and charts · Math · Following instructions
Qwen3.8 Flash Next wins more areas, narrowly.GLM-5.3-Flash is better at agents.
Scores updated · 33 tests both models report · How we compare
Where each one wins
Tests won in each of the eight areas we test. 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 software24Qwen3.8 Flash Next4 of 6 tests
- Images and chartsUnderstanding pictures, charts and video01Qwen3.8 Flash Next1 of 1 test
- MathCompetition and research-level math01Qwen3.8 Flash Next1 of 1 test
- Following instructionsDoing exactly what it is asked01Qwen3.8 Flash Next1 of 1 test
- AgentsCarrying out multi-step tasks on its own20GLM-5.3-Flash2 of 3 tests · 1 tie
- FactsGetting facts right instead of making them up20GLM-5.3-Flash2 of 2 tests
- ReasoningHard problems that need careful thinking22Even2 each
- Long documentsFinding answers in very long texts00Even0 each · 1 tie
Images and charts, math, 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.
Qwen3.8 Flash Next costs 5% less for the same work.
The biggest differences
The three tests each model wins by the widest margin. Scores are out of 100.
Where Qwen3.8 Flash Next pulls ahead
- Follows detailed instructions exactlyLiveBench · Instruction Following+24.3points ahead
- Recent programming contest problemsLiveCodeBench v6+11.3points ahead
- Fresh logic puzzles that change regularlyLiveBench · Reasoning+9.8points ahead
Where GLM-5.3-Flash pulls ahead
- Avoids making up answers it doesn't knowAA-Omniscience · Non-hallucination+17.7points ahead
- Complex command-line tasks across many fieldsTerminal-Bench 4.0+7.5points ahead
- Programming problems, refreshed regularlyLiveBench · Coding+6.4points ahead
Every test, side by side
All 33 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
CodingQwen3.8 Flash Next
- LiveCodeBench v6Qwen3.8 Flash Next by 11.380.691.9+11.3
- LiveBench · CodingGLM-5.3-Flash by 6.47972.5+6.4
- LiveBench · Agentic CodingQwen3.8 Flash Next by 4.856.861.6+4.8
- LMArena · WebDevQwen3.8 Flash Next by 27 rating points16061633+27 rating
- Terminal-Bench 2.1Qwen3.8 Flash Next by 1.884.386.1+1.8
- SciCodeGLM-5.3-Flash by 151.650.6+1
AgentsGLM-5.3-Flash
- Terminal-Bench 4.0GLM-5.3-Flash by 7.532.825.3+7.5
- τ-Bench V3 · BankingGLM-5.3-Flash by 1.847.245.4+1.8
- GDPValtie57.256.4tie
ReasoningEven
- LiveBench · ReasoningQwen3.8 Flash Next by 9.877.687.4+9.8
- CritPtGLM-5.3-Flash by 4.315.411.1+4.3
- Humanity's Last ExamGLM-5.3-Flash by 1.939.938+1.9
- GPQA DiamondQwen3.8 Flash Next by 1.191.292.3+1.1
FactsGLM-5.3-Flash
- AA-Omniscience · Non-hallucinationGLM-5.3-Flash by 17.772.454.7+17.7
- AA-Omniscience · AccuracyGLM-5.3-Flash by 327.524.5+3
Images and chartsQwen3.8 Flash Next
- CharXiv (RQ)Qwen3.8 Flash Next by 1.289.490.6+1.2
Following instructionsQwen3.8 Flash Next
- LiveBench · Instruction FollowingQwen3.8 Flash Next by 24.352.877.1+24.3
Other results14 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.
- Agents' Last ExamQwen3.8 Flash Next by 24.926.351.2+24.9
- AA-OmniscienceGLM-5.3-Flash by 17.27.5-9.7+17.2
- NL2RepoGLM-5.3-Flash by 8.256.348.1+8.2
- BabyVisionGLM-5.3-Flash by 6.653.446.8+6.6
- AA Agentic IndexQwen3.8 Flash Next by 5.251.256.4+5.2
- ToolathlonGLM-5.3-Flash by 4.978.473.5+4.9
- DeepSWE 1.1GLM-5.3-Flash by 4.763.458.7+4.7
- SciCode, subtaskGLM-5.3-Flash by 3.55046.6+3.5
- HLE, text-onlyQwen3.8 Flash Next by 3.136.539.6+3.1
- livebench_languageGLM-5.3-Flash by 2.777.374.6+2.7
- livebench_data_analysisGLM-5.3-Flash by 2.276.474.2+2.2
- AA IntelligenceGLM-5.3-Flash by 241.839.8+2
- Artificial Analysis Coding IndexQwen3.8 Flash Next by 1.671.573.1+1.6
- MMLU-ProXtie8383tie
Questions people ask
Which is better, GLM-5.3-Flash or Qwen3.8 Flash Next?
Qwen3.8 Flash Next wins four of the eight areas we test: coding, images and charts, math and following instructions. GLM-5.3-Flash wins agents and facts. They are level on reasoning and long documents.
Which is better for coding?
Qwen3.8 Flash Next. It wins 4 of the 6 coding tests both models report; GLM-5.3-Flash wins 2.
Which is cheaper?
GLM-5.3-Flash costs $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.50 per million output tokens; Qwen3.8 Flash Next costs $0.15 and $0.47. That makes Qwen3.8 Flash Next about 5% cheaper for the same work.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 33 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 19 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 14 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.