Model comparison
GLM-4.6V vs GPT-5.3 Chat
GPT-5.3 Chat is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.8 to 41.3 on the Noometry Index. GLM-4.6V costs 11× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.3 Chat's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 11 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.6V scores higher in 0 categories and GPT-5.3 Chat in 7 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where GPT-5.3 Chat leads 63.1 to 56.6.
- GLM-4.6V is cheaper at $0.30 / $0.90 per million input/output tokens, against $1.75 / $14 for GPT-5.3 Chat.
- GLM-4.6V has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| GLM-4.6V | GPT-5.3 Chat | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | OpenAI |
| Noometry Index | 41.3 | 42.8 |
| Released | 2025-12-08 | 2026-03-03 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 128K | 128K |
| Max output | 33K | 16K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.30 | $1.75 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.90 | $14 |
| Results tracked | 12 | 18 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Too close to call
GLM-4.6V: 40.9 (#128), GPT-5.3 Chat: 41.4 (#124)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | GPT-5.3 Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1390 | 1408 |
Reasoning Too close to call
GLM-4.6V: 27.6 (#115), GPT-5.3 Chat: 28.5 (#102)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | GPT-5.3 Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1368 | 1399 |
Math Not comparable
GLM-4.6V: —, GPT-5.3 Chat: 38.2 (#142)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | GPT-5.3 Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | — | 1389 |
Knowledge Too close to call
GLM-4.6V: 38.0 (#149), GPT-5.3 Chat: 38.8 (#140)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | GPT-5.3 Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1371 | 1397 |
Multimodal Not comparable
GLM-4.6V: 34.8 (#90), GPT-5.3 Chat: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | GPT-5.3 Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1164 | — |
Multilingual GPT-5.3 Chat leads
GLM-4.6V: 48.6 (#141), GPT-5.3 Chat: 50.3 (#124)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | GPT-5.3 Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1359 | 1382 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1425 | 1432 |
| LMArena Russian | 1340 | 1400 |
| LMArena French | — | 1397 |
| LMArena German | — | 1384 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1352 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1346 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1371 |
Instruction Following GPT-5.3 Chat leads
GLM-4.6V: 71.4 (#151), GPT-5.3 Chat: 72.8 (#129)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | GPT-5.3 Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1352 | 1378 |
Long Context GPT-5.3 Chat leads
GLM-4.6V: 41.3 (#143), GPT-5.3 Chat: 42.6 (#120)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | GPT-5.3 Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1358 | 1396 |
Writing & Preference GPT-5.3 Chat leads
GLM-4.6V: 56.6 (#137), GPT-5.3 Chat: 63.1 (#68)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | GPT-5.3 Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1377 | 1389 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1347 | 1355 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1360 | 1412 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1690 |
Frequently asked questions
Is GLM-4.6V better than GPT-5.3 Chat?
GPT-5.3 Chat is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.8 to 41.3 on the Noometry Index. GLM-4.6V costs 11× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.3 Chat's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, GLM-4.6V or GPT-5.3 Chat?
GLM-4.6V is cheaper. It lists at $0.30 per million input tokens and $0.90 per million output tokens; GPT-5.3 Chat lists at $1.75 and $14.
Is GLM-4.6V or GPT-5.3 Chat better for coding?
They score almost the same on coding (40.9 vs 41.4); test both on your own repository before choosing.
Which has the bigger context window?
Both accept 128K tokens.
How many benchmarks do GLM-4.6V and GPT-5.3 Chat share?
11 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.6V has 12 scored results on Noometry and GPT-5.3 Chat has 18.