DeepSeek V4 Flash vs GLM-5.3-Flash
DeepSeek V4 Flash 
GLM-5.3-Flash Verdict
- GLM-5.3-Flash leads on quality: 63.9 vs 62.1.
- DeepSeek V4 Flash (max) is stronger in composite, instruction following, reasoning.
- GLM-5.3-Flash is stronger in agents & tools, coding, knowledge, long context, maths, human preference, multimodal.
- GLM-5.3-Flash is 2.2× cheaper ($0.119 vs $0.262 per 1M blended).
- DeepSeek V4 Flash (max) streams 2.2× faster (212 vs 98 tokens per second).
| Metric | DeepSeek V4 Flash (max) | GLM-5.3-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| BenchLeader Index | 62.1 | 63.9 |
| Agents & tools score | 67.0 | 68.0 |
| Coding score | 49.1 | 64.0 |
| Composite score | 72.8 | 61.7 |
| Instruction following score | 76.7 | – |
| Knowledge score | 57.4 | 67.8 |
| Long context score | 66.3 | 66.5 |
| Maths score | 57.3 | 71.0 |
| Reasoning score | 73.9 | 70.3 |
| Human preference score | – | 67.6 |
| Multimodal score | – | 65.3 |
| Blended price $/M | $0.262 | $0.119 |
| Output speed | 212 tok/s | 98 tok/s |
| Time to first answer | 10.6 s | 22.9 s |
| Context window | 1M | 1M |
| SciCode | 44.9% | 46.1% |
| WeirdML | 45.6% | – |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | – | 151.4 |
| LMArena Text | – | 1475 |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | – | 1498 |
| LMArena Coding | – | 1525 |
| LMArena WebDev | – | 1607 |
| LMArena Vision | – | 1299 |
| LMArena Agent | – | 1.1 |
| LiveBench | – | 71.6% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | – | 77.6% |
| LiveBench Coding | – | 79.0% |
| LiveBench Agentic Coding | – | 56.8% |
| LiveBench Mathematics | – | 81.2% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | – | 76.4% |
| LiveBench Language | – | 77.3% |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | – | 52.8% |
| AA Intelligence Index | 34.5 | 41.9 |
| IFBench | 79.2% | – |
| AA-LCR | 79.7% | 80.0% |
| AA-Omniscience | -14.3 | 7.5 |
| Terminal-Bench Hard | 35.6% | – |
| GPQA Diamond (AA) | 90.8% | 91.2% |
| Humanity's Last Exam (AA) | 38.5% | 39.9% |
| SciCode (AA) | 50.4% | 51.6% |
| τ²-Bench Telecom (AA) | 95.0% | – |
| AIME 2026 | 95.8% | – |
| HMMT February 2026 | 93.9% | – |
| MathArena Apex | 27.1% | – |
| CritPt | 16.6% | 15.4% |
| GDPval (AA) | 47.1% | 57.8% |
| τ²-Bench Banking (AA) | 39.4% | 47.2% |
| ITBench SRE (AA) | 31.5% | – |
| Analyst Agent (AA) | 25.0% | – |
| LMArena Maths | – | 1513 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | – | 1435 |
| LMArena Instruction Following | – | 1471 |
| LMArena Multi-turn | – | 1475 |
| LMArena Longer Queries | – | 1476 |
| LMCA | 35.9% | – |
| DTBench | 86.4% | – |
Data as of 2026-09-19. Best configuration of each model; every score links to its source on the model pages.
DeepSeek V4 Flash vs GLM-5.3-Flash: questions
- Is DeepSeek V4 Flash better than GLM-5.3-Flash?
- GLM-5.3-Flash leads on quality: 63.9 vs 62.1. 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 Flash better than GLM-5.3-Flash for coding?
- GLM-5.3-Flash scores higher in coding (64 vs 49 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Is DeepSeek V4 Flash better than GLM-5.3-Flash for agentic tasks?
- GLM-5.3-Flash scores higher in agentic tasks (68 vs 67 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Which is cheaper, DeepSeek V4 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 Flash or GLM-5.3-Flash?
- DeepSeek V4 Flash streams faster: 212 against 98 output tokens per second.
- Which has the larger context window?
- Both accept 1M tokens of context.