Model comparison

Codellama 70b Instruct vs GLM-5.3-Flash

GLM-5.3-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.8 to 33.7 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 4 shared benchmarks.

Codellama 70b Instruct Meta

33.7

Rank #237 Confirmed

GLM-5.3-Flash Z.ai (Zhipu)

51.8

Rank #41 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 4 benchmarks with published results for both. Codellama 70b Instruct scores higher in 0 categories and GLM-5.3-Flash in 5 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where GLM-5.3-Flash leads 65.3 to 33.4.

Side by side

Codellama 70b Instruct and GLM-5.3-Flash specifications
Codellama 70b InstructGLM-5.3-Flash
ProviderMetaZ.ai (Zhipu)
Noometry Index33.751.8
Released—2026-08-20
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window—1M
Max output—131K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.15
Output $ / M tokens—$0.50
Results tracked740

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

Category by category

Coding GLM-5.3-Flash leads

Codellama 70b Instruct: 37.6 (#193), GLM-5.3-Flash: 53.1 (#31)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkCodellama 70b InstructGLM-5.3-Flash
DeepSWE—63.4%
FrontierCode—31.8%
CursorBench—36.8%
LMArena WebDev—1609
FrontierSWE—18.1%
SciCode—51.6%
BigCodeBench Instruct40.7%—
LMArena Coding—1508
BigCodeBench Complete49.6%—
ALE-Bench—303.55
HumanEval+65.9%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Codellama 70b Instruct: —, GLM-5.3-Flash: 34.2 (#47)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkCodellama 70b InstructGLM-5.3-Flash
APEX-Agents—52.8%
GDP.pdf—14%

Reasoning GLM-5.3-Flash leads

Codellama 70b Instruct: 20.1 (#242), GLM-5.3-Flash: 48.0 (#42)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkCodellama 70b InstructGLM-5.3-Flash
LMArena Hard Prompts10521491
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 Not comparable

Codellama 70b Instruct: —, GLM-5.3-Flash: 53.3 (#47)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkCodellama 70b InstructGLM-5.3-Flash
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—55.8%
FrontierMath Tier 4—17.1%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—93.9%
ProofBench—21%
LMArena Math—1500

Knowledge Not comparable

Codellama 70b Instruct: —, GLM-5.3-Flash: 58.4 (#36)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkCodellama 70b InstructGLM-5.3-Flash
GPQA Diamond—90.2%
LMArena Expert—1513

Multimodal Not comparable

Codellama 70b Instruct: —, GLM-5.3-Flash: 42.8 (#27)

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkCodellama 70b InstructGLM-5.3-Flash
LMArena Vision—1296

Multilingual GLM-5.3-Flash leads

Codellama 70b Instruct: 24.8 (#288), GLM-5.3-Flash: 56.0 (#25)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkCodellama 70b InstructGLM-5.3-Flash
LMArena Non-English9921462
LMArena Chinese—1527
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 70b Instruct: 51.9 (#293), GLM-5.3-Flash: 77.5 (#20)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkCodellama 70b InstructGLM-5.3-Flash
LMArena Instruction Following10241478

Long Context Not comparable

Codellama 70b Instruct: —, GLM-5.3-Flash: 45.4 (#39)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkCodellama 70b InstructGLM-5.3-Flash
LMArena Longer Query—1482

Writing & Preference GLM-5.3-Flash leads

Codellama 70b Instruct: 33.4 (#277), GLM-5.3-Flash: 65.3 (#50)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkCodellama 70b InstructGLM-5.3-Flash
LMArena Text10571471
LMArena Creative Writing—1442
LMArena Multi-Turn—1467

Frequently asked questions

Is Codellama 70b Instruct better than GLM-5.3-Flash?

GLM-5.3-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.8 to 33.7 on the Noometry Index.

Is Codellama 70b Instruct or GLM-5.3-Flash better for coding?

GLM-5.3-Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 53.1 versus 37.6 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Codellama 70b Instruct and GLM-5.3-Flash share?

4 benchmarks have published results for both models. Codellama 70b Instruct has 7 scored results on Noometry and GLM-5.3-Flash has 40.

Related comparisons

Go deeper