DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs GLM-5.3-Flash
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 
GLM-5.3-Flash Verdict
- GLM-5.3-Flash leads on quality: 63.9 vs 61.9.
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (max) is stronger in coding, composite, long context.
- GLM-5.3-Flash is stronger in agents & tools, knowledge, multimodal, reasoning, human preference, maths.
- GLM-5.3-Flash is 2.2× cheaper ($0.119 vs $0.262 per 1M blended).
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (max) streams 2.2× faster (215 vs 98 tokens per second).
| Metric | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (max) | GLM-5.3-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| BenchLeader Index | 61.9 | 63.9 |
| Agents & tools score | 59.6 | 68.0 |
| Coding score | 68.9 | 64.0 |
| Composite score | 74.5 | 61.7 |
| Knowledge score | 61.7 | 67.8 |
| Long context score | 68.5 | 66.5 |
| Multimodal score | 61.4 | 65.3 |
| Reasoning score | 69.5 | 70.3 |
| Human preference score | – | 67.6 |
| Maths score | – | 71.0 |
| Blended price $/M | $0.262 | $0.119 |
| Output speed | 215 tok/s | 98 tok/s |
| Time to first answer | 10.5 s | 22.9 s |
| Context window | 1M | 1M |
| SciCode | – | 46.1% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | – | 151.4 |
| LMArena Text | – | 1475 |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | – | 1498 |
| LMArena Coding | – | 1525 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1614 | 1607 |
| LMArena Vision | – | 1299 |
| LMArena Agent | 4.9 | 1.1 |
| LiveBench | 81.1% | 71.6% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 86.7% | 77.6% |
| LiveBench Coding | 80.0% | 79.0% |
| LiveBench Agentic Coding | 77.3% | 56.8% |
| LiveBench Mathematics | 93.3% | 81.2% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 79.3% | 76.4% |
| LiveBench Language | 81.2% | 77.3% |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 70.0% | 52.8% |
| AA Intelligence Index | 39.5 | 41.9 |
| AA-LCR | 84.0% | 80.0% |
| MMMU-Pro | 77.0% | – |
| AA-Omniscience | -5.3 | 7.5 |
| GPQA Diamond (AA) | – | 91.2% |
| Humanity's Last Exam (AA) | 39.3% | 39.9% |
| SciCode (AA) | 51.9% | 51.6% |
| CritPt | 14.3% | 15.4% |
| GDPval (AA) | 56.6% | 57.8% |
| τ²-Bench Banking (AA) | – | 47.2% |
| LMArena Maths | – | 1513 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | – | 1435 |
| LMArena Instruction Following | – | 1471 |
| LMArena Multi-turn | – | 1475 |
| LMArena Longer Queries | – | 1476 |
Data as of 2026-09-19. Best configuration of each model; every score links to its source on the model pages.
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs GLM-5.3-Flash: questions
- Is DeepSeek V4.1 Flash better than GLM-5.3-Flash?
- GLM-5.3-Flash leads on quality: 63.9 vs 61.9. The BenchLeader Index combines every independent quality benchmark; GLM-5.3-Flash is ahead overall as of 2026-09-19, but check the category scores for your use.
- Is DeepSeek V4.1 Flash better than GLM-5.3-Flash for coding?
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash scores higher in coding (69 vs 64 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Is DeepSeek V4.1 Flash better than GLM-5.3-Flash for agentic tasks?
- GLM-5.3-Flash scores higher in agentic tasks (68 vs 60 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Which is cheaper, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash or GLM-5.3-Flash?
- GLM-5.3-Flash is cheaper: $0.119 against $0.262 per million tokens, blended at three input tokens per output token.
- Which is faster, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash or GLM-5.3-Flash?
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash streams faster: 215 against 98 output tokens per second.
- Which has the larger context window?
- Both accept 1M tokens of context.