GLM 5.3 Flash vs Grok 4
GLM 5.3 Flash 
Grok 4 Verdict
- GLM 5.3 Flash and Grok 4 are level on quality (60.1 vs 59.8).
- GLM 5.3 Flash is stronger in coding, composite, human preference, knowledge, multimodal, reasoning.
- Grok 4 is stronger in agents & tools, long context, instruction following, maths.
- GLM 5.3 Flash is 13× cheaper ($0.119 vs $1.56 per 1M blended).
| Metric | GLM 5.3 Flash | Grok 4 |
|---|---|---|
| BenchLeader Index | 60.1 | 59.8 |
| Agents & tools score | 51.5 | 53.4 |
| Coding score | 64.0 | 61.2 |
| Composite score | 58.2 | – |
| Human preference score | 67.6 | 59.8 |
| Knowledge score | 64.3 | 56.0 |
| Long context score | 64.1 | 77.7 |
| Multimodal score | 65.5 | 54.5 |
| Reasoning score | 67.5 | 58.3 |
| Instruction following score | – | 67.7 |
| Maths score | – | 58.0 |
| Blended price $/M | $0.119 | $1.56 |
| Output speed | 107 tok/s | – |
| Time to first answer | 21.1 s | – |
| Context window | 1M | 256k |
| GPQA Diamond | – | 87.0% |
| OTIS Mock AIME | – | 84.0% |
| Terminal-Bench | – | 27.2% |
| SimpleBench | – | 60.5% |
| Fiction.LiveBench 120k | – | 96.9% |
| SciCode | 46.1% | – |
| Cybench | – | 43.0% |
| WeirdML | – | 45.7% |
| APEX-Agents | – | 15.2% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 151.4 | 146.4 |
| LMArena Text | 1475 | 1411 |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1497 | 1420 |
| LMArena Coding | 1524 | 1435 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1607 | – |
| LMArena Vision | 1296 | 1210 |
| LMArena Agent | 1.9 | – |
| 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% | – |
| AA Intelligence Index | 41.9 | – |
| AA-LCR | 80.0% | – |
| AA-Omniscience | 7.5 | – |
| GPQA Diamond (AA) | 91.2% | – |
| Humanity's Last Exam (AA) | 39.9% | – |
| SciCode (AA) | 51.6% | – |
| AIME (Vals) | – | 90.6% |
| LiveCodeBench | – | 83.3% |
| MMLU-Pro | – | 85.3% |
| LegalBench | – | 83.2% |
| CorpFin | – | 66.0% |
| TaxEval | – | 65.1% |
| MedQA | – | 92.5% |
| MGSM | – | 90.9% |
| SWE-bench (Vals) | – | 57.8% |
| GPQA Diamond (Vals) | – | 88.1% |
| IMO 2025 | – | 21.4% |
| MathArena Apex | – | 2.1% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | – | 73.6% |
| IFEval (HELM) | – | 94.9% |
| Omni-MATH (HELM) | – | 60.3% |
| WildBench (HELM) | – | 79.7% |
| MMLU-Pro (HELM) | – | 85.1% |
| GPQA Diamond (HELM) | – | 72.6% |
| HELM Capabilities mean | – | 78.5% |
| Aider Polyglot | – | 79.6% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | – | 79.6% |
| ARC-AGI-2 | – | 29.4% |
| BFCL Overall | – | 63.0% |
Data as of 2026-09-13. Best configuration of each model; every score links to its source on the model pages.
GLM 5.3 Flash vs Grok 4: questions
- Is GLM 5.3 Flash better than Grok 4?
- GLM 5.3 Flash and Grok 4 are level on quality (60.1 vs 59.8). The BenchLeader Index combines every independent quality benchmark; GLM 5.3 Flash is ahead overall as of 2026-09-13, but check the category scores for your use.
- Is GLM 5.3 Flash better than Grok 4 for coding?
- GLM 5.3 Flash scores higher in coding (64 vs 61 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Is GLM 5.3 Flash better than Grok 4 for agentic tasks?
- Grok 4 scores higher in agentic tasks (53 vs 52 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Which is cheaper, GLM 5.3 Flash or Grok 4?
- GLM 5.3 Flash is cheaper: $0.119 against $1.56 per million tokens, blended at three input tokens per output token.
- Which has the larger context window?
- GLM 5.3 Flash accepts more context: 1M against 256k tokens.