Noometry

Model comparison

Codellama 34b Instruct vs GLM-5.3-Flash

GLM-5.3-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.8 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 10 shared benchmarks.

Codellama 34b Instruct Meta

30.8

Rank #287 Confirmed

GLM-5.3-Flash Z.ai (Zhipu)

51.8

Rank #41 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 10 benchmarks with published results for both. Codellama 34b Instruct scores higher in 0 categories and GLM-5.3-Flash in 7 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where GLM-5.3-Flash leads 65.3 to 28.2.

Side by side

Codellama 34b InstructGLM-5.3-Flash
ProviderMetaZ.ai (Zhipu)
Noometry Index30.851.8
Released—2026-08-20
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window—1M
Max output—131K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.15
Output $ / M tokens—$0.50
Results tracked1440

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding GLM-5.3-Flash leads

Codellama 34b Instruct: 28.5 (#314), GLM-5.3-Flash: 53.1 (#31)

BenchmarkCodellama 34b InstructGLM-5.3-Flash
LMArena Coding10461508
DeepSWE—63.4%
FrontierCode—31.8%
CursorBench—36.8%
LMArena WebDev—1609
FrontierSWE—18.1%
SciCode—51.6%
BigCodeBench Instruct29%—
BigCodeBench Complete37.1%—
ALE-Bench—303.55
HumanEval+43.9%—
MBPP+56.3%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Codellama 34b Instruct: —, GLM-5.3-Flash: 34.2 (#47)

BenchmarkCodellama 34b InstructGLM-5.3-Flash
APEX-Agents—52.8%
GDP.pdf—14%

Reasoning GLM-5.3-Flash leads

Codellama 34b Instruct: 19.6 (#255), GLM-5.3-Flash: 48.0 (#42)

BenchmarkCodellama 34b InstructGLM-5.3-Flash
LMArena Hard Prompts10321491
ARC-AGI-2—65.8%
ARC-AGI-1—91%
CritPt—15.4%
Chess Puzzles—14%
Mystery Game Puzzles—8%
Surface Evolver Bench—52.5%
Bench to the Future 3—0.15
Epoch Capabilities Index—151.88

Math GLM-5.3-Flash leads

Codellama 34b Instruct: 31.0 (#230), GLM-5.3-Flash: 53.3 (#47)

BenchmarkCodellama 34b InstructGLM-5.3-Flash
LMArena Math10561500
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—55.8%
FrontierMath Tier 4—17.1%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—93.9%
ProofBench—21%

Knowledge Not comparable

Codellama 34b Instruct: —, GLM-5.3-Flash: 58.4 (#36)

BenchmarkCodellama 34b InstructGLM-5.3-Flash
GPQA Diamond—90.2%
LMArena Expert—1513

Multimodal Not comparable

Codellama 34b Instruct: —, GLM-5.3-Flash: 42.8 (#27)

BenchmarkCodellama 34b InstructGLM-5.3-Flash
LMArena Vision—1296

Multilingual GLM-5.3-Flash leads

Codellama 34b Instruct: 25.8 (#284), GLM-5.3-Flash: 56.0 (#25)

BenchmarkCodellama 34b InstructGLM-5.3-Flash
LMArena Non-English10111462
LMArena Chinese9761527
LMArena French—1496
LMArena German—1470
LMArena Japanese—1429
LMArena Korean—1446
LMArena Russian—1469
LMArena Spanish—1471

Instruction Following GLM-5.3-Flash leads

Codellama 34b Instruct: 52.2 (#291), GLM-5.3-Flash: 77.5 (#20)

BenchmarkCodellama 34b InstructGLM-5.3-Flash
LMArena Instruction Following10281478

Long Context GLM-5.3-Flash leads

Codellama 34b Instruct: 30.9 (#284), GLM-5.3-Flash: 45.4 (#39)

BenchmarkCodellama 34b InstructGLM-5.3-Flash
LMArena Longer Query10131482

Writing & Preference GLM-5.3-Flash leads

Codellama 34b Instruct: 28.2 (#297), GLM-5.3-Flash: 65.3 (#50)

BenchmarkCodellama 34b InstructGLM-5.3-Flash
LMArena Text10661471
LMArena Creative Writing10321442
LMArena Multi-Turn10151467

Frequently asked questions

Is Codellama 34b Instruct better than GLM-5.3-Flash?

GLM-5.3-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.8 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index.

Is Codellama 34b Instruct or GLM-5.3-Flash better for coding?

GLM-5.3-Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 53.1 versus 28.5 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Codellama 34b Instruct and GLM-5.3-Flash share?

10 benchmarks have published results for both models. Codellama 34b Instruct has 14 scored results on Noometry and GLM-5.3-Flash has 40.

Related comparisons

Go deeper