Gemini 3.1 Pro vs GLM 5.3
Gemini 3.1 Pro 
GLM 5.3 Verdict
- Gemini 3.1 Pro leads on quality: 62.8 vs 60.0.
- Gemini 3.1 Pro is stronger in agents & tools, composite, instruction following, knowledge, long context, maths, multimodal, reasoning.
- GLM 5.3 (max) is stronger in coding, human preference.
- GLM 5.3 (max) is 2.1× cheaper ($2.15 vs $4.50 per 1M blended).
- Gemini 3.1 Pro streams 1.7× faster (115 vs 66 tokens per second).
| Metric | Gemini 3.1 Pro | GLM 5.3 (max) |
|---|---|---|
| BenchLeader Index | 62.8 | 60.0 |
| Agents & tools score | 62.6 | 52.8 |
| Coding score | 59.8 | 64.3 |
| Composite score | 61.5 | – |
| Human preference score | 59.8 | 68.9 |
| Instruction following score | 68.4 | – |
| Knowledge score | 64.9 | 55.8 |
| Long context score | 65.2 | – |
| Maths score | 60.7 | 60.0 |
| Multimodal score | 65.8 | – |
| Reasoning score | 69.8 | 66.9 |
| Blended price $/M | $4.50 | $2.15 |
| Output speed | 115 tok/s | 66 tok/s |
| Time to first answer | 23.4 s | 33.5 s |
| Context window | 1.0M | 1M |
| GPQA Diamond | 94.1% | 90.9% |
| FrontierMath Tiers 1–3 | 59.6% | 68.8% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 26.8% | 29.3% |
| OTIS Mock AIME | 95.6% | 91.1% |
| SimpleQA Verified | – | 41.0% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 46.4% | – |
| Terminal-Bench | 80.2% | 41.8% |
| SimpleBench | 79.6% | – |
| SciCode | 58.9% | 56.5% |
| WeirdML | 72.1% | 75.4% |
| APEX-Agents | 33.5% | – |
| ProofBench | 26.0% | 49.0% |
| GSO-Bench | 22.6% | – |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 155 | – |
| LMArena Text | 1487 | 1486 |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1508 | 1509 |
| LMArena Coding | 1520 | 1526 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1447 | 1614 |
| LMArena Vision | 1295 | – |
| LMArena Agent | -5.6 | 2.6 |
| AA Intelligence Index | 30.4 | – |
| IFBench | 77.1% | – |
| AA-LCR | 82.0% | – |
| MMMU-Pro | 82.4% | – |
| AA-Omniscience | 31.9 | – |
| Terminal-Bench Hard | 53.8% | – |
| GPQA Diamond (AA) | 94.1% | – |
| Humanity's Last Exam (AA) | 47.0% | – |
| SciCode (AA) | 58.7% | – |
| τ²-Bench Telecom (AA) | 95.6% | – |
| 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 |
| AIME 2026 | 98.3% | – |
| HMMT February 2026 | 94.7% | – |
| MathArena Apex | 60.9% | – |
| MultiChallenge | 71.4% | – |
| PRBench Finance | 41.9% | – |
| PRBench Legal | 44.0% | – |
| MultiNRC | 64.7% | – |
| HiL-Bench | 35.3% | – |
| TutorBench | 53.0% | – |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1142 | – |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 98.0% | – |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 77.1% | – |
| ARC-AGI-3 | 0.4% | – |
Data as of 2026-09-13. Best configuration of each model; every score links to its source on the model pages.
Gemini 3.1 Pro vs GLM 5.3: questions
- Is Gemini 3.1 Pro better than GLM 5.3?
- Gemini 3.1 Pro leads on quality: 62.8 vs 60.0. The BenchLeader Index combines every independent quality benchmark; Gemini 3.1 Pro is ahead overall as of 2026-09-13, but check the category scores for your use.
- Is Gemini 3.1 Pro better than GLM 5.3 for coding?
- GLM 5.3 scores higher in coding (64 vs 60 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Is Gemini 3.1 Pro better than GLM 5.3 for agentic tasks?
- Gemini 3.1 Pro scores higher in agentic tasks (63 vs 53 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Which is cheaper, Gemini 3.1 Pro or GLM 5.3?
- GLM 5.3 is cheaper: $2.15 against $4.50 per million tokens, blended at three input tokens per output token.
- Which is faster, Gemini 3.1 Pro or GLM 5.3?
- Gemini 3.1 Pro streams faster: 115 against 66 output tokens per second.
- Which has the larger context window?
- Gemini 3.1 Pro accepts more context: 1.0M against 1M tokens.