GLM 5.3 Flash vs Qwen3 7
GLM 5.3 Flash 
Qwen3 7 Verdict
- GLM 5.3 Flash and Qwen3 7 (max) are level on quality (61.1 vs 61.3).
- GLM 5.3 Flash is stronger in coding, composite, human preference, knowledge, long context, multimodal, reasoning.
- Qwen3 7 (max) is stronger in agents & tools, instruction following, maths.
- GLM 5.3 Flash is 32× cheaper ($0.119 vs $3.75 per 1M blended).
- Qwen3 7 (max) streams 1.9× faster (169 vs 90 tokens per second).
| Metric | GLM 5.3 Flash | Qwen3 7 (max) |
|---|---|---|
| BenchLeader Index | 61.1 | 61.3 |
| Agents & tools score | 52.1 | 56.0 |
| Coding score | 64.3 | 61.4 |
| Composite score | 61.7 | 56.4 |
| Human preference score | 67.6 | 57.2 |
| Knowledge score | 67.7 | 63.6 |
| Long context score | 66.6 | 66.0 |
| Multimodal score | 65.5 | – |
| Reasoning score | 67.5 | 66.8 |
| Instruction following score | – | 77.6 |
| Maths score | – | 57.4 |
| Blended price $/M | $0.119 | $3.75 |
| Output speed | 90 tok/s | 169 tok/s |
| Time to first answer | 24.9 s | 16.5 s |
| Context window | 1M | 1M |
| GPQA Diamond | – | 90.9% |
| FrontierMath Tiers 1–3 | – | 64.6% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | – | 34.1% |
| OTIS Mock AIME | – | 95.6% |
| SWE-bench Verified (Epoch) | – | 77.3% |
| SimpleQA Verified | – | 55.8% |
| SimpleBench | – | 70.4% |
| SciCode | 46.1% | 48.8% |
| ProofBench | – | 26.0% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 151.4 | 153.7 |
| LMArena Text | 1474 | 1474 |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1496 | 1495 |
| LMArena Coding | 1534 | 1525 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1605 | 1517 |
| LMArena Vision | 1296 | – |
| LMArena Agent | 2 | -3.1 |
| LiveBench | 71.6% | 73.1% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 77.6% | 83.3% |
| LiveBench Coding | 79.0% | 74.2% |
| LiveBench Agentic Coding | 56.8% | 43.6% |
| LiveBench Mathematics | 81.2% | 85.3% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 76.4% | 71.8% |
| LiveBench Language | 77.3% | 79.7% |
| AA Intelligence Index | 41.9 | 29.9 |
| IFBench | – | 80.5% |
| AA-LCR | 80.0% | 79.0% |
| AA-Omniscience | 7.5 | 13.5 |
| Terminal-Bench Hard | – | 50.8% |
| GPQA Diamond (AA) | 91.2% | 92.3% |
| Humanity's Last Exam (AA) | 39.9% | 40.5% |
| SciCode (AA) | 51.6% | 49.5% |
| τ²-Bench Telecom (AA) | – | 94.7% |
| LiveCodeBench | – | 87.1% |
| MMLU-Pro | – | 89.3% |
| IOI | – | 46.8% |
| LegalBench | – | 84.9% |
| CorpFin | – | 63.7% |
| TaxEval | – | 75.3% |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals) | – | 61.0% |
| SWE-bench (Vals) | – | 68.8% |
| GPQA Diamond (Vals) | – | 90.2% |
| Vals Index | – | 44.8 |
| EQ-Bench 4 | – | 1110 |
Data as of 2026-09-10. Best configuration of each model; every score links to its source on the model pages.
GLM 5.3 Flash vs Qwen3 7: questions
- Is GLM 5.3 Flash better than Qwen3 7?
- GLM 5.3 Flash and Qwen3 7 (max) are level on quality (61.1 vs 61.3). The BenchLeader Index combines every independent quality benchmark; Qwen3 7 (max) is ahead overall as of 2026-09-10, but check the category scores for your use.
- Is GLM 5.3 Flash better than Qwen3 7 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 Qwen3 7 for agentic tasks?
- Qwen3 7 scores higher in agentic tasks (56 vs 52 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Which is cheaper, GLM 5.3 Flash or Qwen3 7?
- GLM 5.3 Flash is cheaper: $0.119 against $3.75 per million tokens, blended at three input tokens per output token.
- Which is faster, GLM 5.3 Flash or Qwen3 7?
- Qwen3 7 streams faster: 169 against 90 output tokens per second.
- Which has the larger context window?
- Both accept 1M tokens of context.