GLM 5.3 Flash vs o3
GLM 5.3 Flash 
o3 Verdict
- GLM 5.3 Flash and o3 are level on quality (61.0 vs 61.6).
- GLM 5.3 Flash is stronger in coding, composite, human preference, knowledge, long context, multimodal, reasoning.
- o3 is stronger in agents & tools, instruction following, maths.
- GLM 5.3 Flash is 29× cheaper ($0.119 vs $3.50 per 1M blended).
| Metric | GLM 5.3 Flash | o3 |
|---|---|---|
| BenchLeader Index | 61.0 | 61.6 |
| Agents & tools score | 51.5 | 70.3 |
| Coding score | 64.0 | 62.0 |
| Composite score | 61.8 | 54.5 |
| Human preference score | 67.6 | 62.3 |
| Knowledge score | 67.8 | 58.0 |
| Long context score | 66.5 | 63.8 |
| Multimodal score | 65.5 | 57.9 |
| Reasoning score | 67.5 | 61.5 |
| Instruction following score | – | 65.0 |
| Maths score | – | 78.6 |
| Blended price $/M | $0.119 | $3.50 |
| Output speed | 98 tok/s | 107 tok/s |
| Time to first answer | 22.9 s | 6.3 s |
| Context window | 1M | 200k |
| SciCode | 46.1% | – |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 151.4 | 146.9 |
| LMArena Text | 1475 | 1432 |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1497 | 1441 |
| LMArena Coding | 1524 | 1460 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1607 | – |
| LMArena Vision | 1296 | 1214 |
| 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 | 20.2 |
| IFBench | – | 71.4% |
| AA-LCR | 80.0% | 74.7% |
| MMMU-Pro | – | 70.1% |
| AA-Omniscience | 7.5 | -15.6 |
| Terminal-Bench Hard | – | 37.1% |
| GPQA Diamond (AA) | 91.2% | 82.7% |
| Humanity's Last Exam (AA) | 39.9% | 20.1% |
| SciCode (AA) | 51.6% | – |
| τ²-Bench Telecom (AA) | – | 80.7% |
| PRBench Finance | – | 47.7% |
| PRBench Legal | – | 48.6% |
| MMMU (validation) | – | 82.9% |
| MMMU-Pro (official) | – | 76.4% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | – | 67.6% |
| IFEval (HELM) | – | 86.9% |
| Omni-MATH (HELM) | – | 71.4% |
| WildBench (HELM) | – | 86.1% |
| MMLU-Pro (HELM) | – | 85.9% |
| GPQA Diamond (HELM) | – | 75.3% |
| HELM Capabilities mean | – | 81.1% |
| Aider Polyglot | – | 81.3% |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | – | 58.4% |
| SWE-bench Verified (any scaffold) | – | 58.4% |
| BFCL Overall | – | 63.0% |
Data as of 2026-09-12. Best configuration of each model; every score links to its source on the model pages.
GLM 5.3 Flash vs o3: questions
- Is GLM 5.3 Flash better than o3?
- GLM 5.3 Flash and o3 are level on quality (61.0 vs 61.6). The BenchLeader Index combines every independent quality benchmark; o3 is ahead overall as of 2026-09-12, but check the category scores for your use.
- Is GLM 5.3 Flash better than o3 for coding?
- GLM 5.3 Flash scores higher in coding (64 vs 62 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Is GLM 5.3 Flash better than o3 for agentic tasks?
- o3 scores higher in agentic tasks (70 vs 52 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Which is cheaper, GLM 5.3 Flash or o3?
- GLM 5.3 Flash is cheaper: $0.119 against $3.50 per million tokens, blended at three input tokens per output token.
- Which is faster, GLM 5.3 Flash or o3?
- o3 streams faster: 107 against 98 output tokens per second.
- Which has the larger context window?
- GLM 5.3 Flash accepts more context: 1M against 200k tokens.