Model comparison

DeepSeek Coder 33B vs GLM-5.3-Flash

GLM-5.3-Flash has enough public results to be ranked (#41); DeepSeek Coder 33B does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.

DeepSeek Coder 33B DeepSeek

38.9

Unranked Sparse

GLM-5.3-Flash Z.ai (Zhipu)

51.8

Rank #41 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. DeepSeek Coder 33B scores higher in 0 categories and GLM-5.3-Flash in 1 category; one gap is clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in coding, where GLM-5.3-Flash leads 53.1 to 38.0.

Side by side

DeepSeek Coder 33B and GLM-5.3-Flash specifications
DeepSeek Coder 33BGLM-5.3-Flash
ProviderDeepSeekZ.ai (Zhipu)
Noometry Index38.951.8
Released2023-11-022026-08-20
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window—1M
Max output—131K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.15
Output $ / M tokens—$0.50
Results tracked940

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

Category by category

Coding GLM-5.3-Flash leads

DeepSeek Coder 33B: 38.0 (#184), GLM-5.3-Flash: 53.1 (#31)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek Coder 33BGLM-5.3-Flash
DeepSWE—63.4%
FrontierCode—31.8%
CursorBench—36.8%
LMArena WebDev—1609
FrontierSWE—18.1%
SciCode—51.6%
BigCodeBench Instruct42%—
LMArena Coding—1508
BigCodeBench Complete51.1%—
ALE-Bench—303.55
HumanEval+75%—
MBPP+70.1%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

DeepSeek Coder 33B: —, GLM-5.3-Flash: 34.2 (#47)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek Coder 33BGLM-5.3-Flash
APEX-Agents—52.8%
GDP.pdf—14%

Reasoning Not comparable

DeepSeek Coder 33B: —, GLM-5.3-Flash: 48.0 (#42)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek Coder 33BGLM-5.3-Flash
Epoch Capabilities Index96.32151.88
ARC-AGI-2—65.8%
ARC-AGI-1—91%
CritPt—15.4%
Chess Puzzles—14%
LMArena Hard Prompts—1491
Mystery Game Puzzles—8%
Surface Evolver Bench—52.5%
Bench to the Future 3—0.15
WinoGrande62%—

Math Not comparable

DeepSeek Coder 33B: —, GLM-5.3-Flash: 53.3 (#47)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek Coder 33BGLM-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
GSM8K35.4%—

Knowledge Not comparable

DeepSeek Coder 33B: —, GLM-5.3-Flash: 58.4 (#36)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek Coder 33BGLM-5.3-Flash
GPQA Diamond—90.2%
LMArena Expert—1513
ARC (AI2) Challenge42.2%—
MMLU39.4%—

Multimodal Not comparable

DeepSeek Coder 33B: —, GLM-5.3-Flash: 42.8 (#27)

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek Coder 33BGLM-5.3-Flash
LMArena Vision—1296

Multilingual Not comparable

DeepSeek Coder 33B: —, GLM-5.3-Flash: 56.0 (#25)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek Coder 33BGLM-5.3-Flash
LMArena Non-English—1462
LMArena Chinese—1527
LMArena French—1496
LMArena German—1470
LMArena Japanese—1429
LMArena Korean—1446
LMArena Russian—1469
LMArena Spanish—1471

Instruction Following Not comparable

DeepSeek Coder 33B: —, GLM-5.3-Flash: 77.5 (#20)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek Coder 33BGLM-5.3-Flash
LMArena Instruction Following—1478

Long Context Not comparable

DeepSeek Coder 33B: —, GLM-5.3-Flash: 45.4 (#39)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek Coder 33BGLM-5.3-Flash
LMArena Longer Query—1482

Writing & Preference Not comparable

DeepSeek Coder 33B: —, GLM-5.3-Flash: 65.3 (#50)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek Coder 33BGLM-5.3-Flash
LMArena Text—1471
LMArena Creative Writing—1442
LMArena Multi-Turn—1467

Frequently asked questions

Is DeepSeek Coder 33B better than GLM-5.3-Flash?

GLM-5.3-Flash has enough public results to be ranked (#41); DeepSeek Coder 33B does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Is DeepSeek Coder 33B or GLM-5.3-Flash better for coding?

GLM-5.3-Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 53.1 versus 38.0 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do DeepSeek Coder 33B and GLM-5.3-Flash share?

1 benchmark has published results for both models. DeepSeek Coder 33B has 9 scored results on Noometry and GLM-5.3-Flash has 40.

Related comparisons

Go deeper