Deepseek v4 Pro vs GLM 5.3
Deepseek v4 Pro 
GLM 5.3 Verdict
- Deepseek v4 Pro (high) and GLM 5.3 (max) are level on quality (60.4 vs 60.0).
- Deepseek v4 Pro (high) is stronger in maths.
- GLM 5.3 (max) is stronger in coding, human preference, reasoning, agents & tools, knowledge.
| Metric | Deepseek v4 Pro (high) | GLM 5.3 (max) |
|---|---|---|
| BenchLeader Index | 60.4 | 60.0 |
| Coding score | 59.3 | 64.3 |
| Human preference score | 66.0 | 68.9 |
| Maths score | 66.2 | 60.0 |
| Reasoning score | 65.9 | 66.9 |
| Agents & tools score | – | 52.8 |
| Knowledge score | – | 55.8 |
| Blended price $/M | – | $2.15 |
| Output speed | – | 66 tok/s |
| Time to first answer | – | 33.5 s |
| Context window | – | 1M |
| GPQA Diamond | 90.9% | 90.9% |
| FrontierMath Tiers 1–3 | – | 68.8% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | – | 29.3% |
| OTIS Mock AIME | 95.6% | 91.1% |
| SimpleQA Verified | – | 41.0% |
| Terminal-Bench | – | 41.8% |
| SciCode | 46.4% | 56.5% |
| WeirdML | 46.5% | 75.4% |
| ProofBench | – | 49.0% |
| LMArena Text | 1462 | 1486 |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1482 | 1509 |
| LMArena Coding | 1505 | 1526 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1581 | 1614 |
| LMArena Agent | – | 2.6 |
| LiveCodeBench | – | 80.5% |
| MMLU-Pro | – | 86.8% |
| IOI | – | 68.4% |
| LegalBench | – | 84.8% |
| TaxEval | – | 72.4% |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals) | – | 71.5% |
| SWE-bench (Vals) | – | 95.4% |
| GPQA Diamond (Vals) | – | 88.1% |
| Vals Index | – | 57.0 |
Data as of 2026-09-13. Best configuration of each model; every score links to its source on the model pages.
Deepseek v4 Pro vs GLM 5.3: questions
- Is Deepseek v4 Pro better than GLM 5.3?
- Deepseek v4 Pro (high) and GLM 5.3 (max) are level on quality (60.4 vs 60.0). The BenchLeader Index combines every independent quality benchmark; Deepseek v4 Pro (high) is ahead overall as of 2026-09-13, but check the category scores for your use.
- Is Deepseek v4 Pro better than GLM 5.3 for coding?
- GLM 5.3 scores higher in coding (64 vs 59 on the category index, where 50 is average).