Noometry

Model comparison

GLM-5.3-Flash vs GPT-3.5-turbo

GLM-5.3-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.8 to 23.2 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 23 shared benchmarks.

GLM-5.3-Flash Z.ai (Zhipu)

51.8

Rank #41 Confirmed

GPT-3.5-turbo OpenAI

23.2

Rank #350 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 23 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-5.3-Flash scores higher in 8 categories and GPT-3.5-turbo in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where GLM-5.3-Flash leads 58.4 to 10.0.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 93.9% for GLM-5.3-Flash and 2.2% for GPT-3.5-turbo.
  • GLM-5.3-Flash is cheaper at $0.15 / $0.50 per million input/output tokens, against $0.50 / $1.50 for GPT-3.5-turbo.
  • GLM-5.3-Flash accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 16K.
  • GLM-5.3-Flash has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GLM-5.3-FlashGPT-3.5-turbo
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)OpenAI
Noometry Index51.823.2
Released2026-08-202023-03-01
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window1M16K
Max output131K4K
Input $ / M tokens$0.15$0.50
Output $ / M tokens$0.50$1.50
Results tracked4044

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

Category by category

Coding GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 53.1 (#31), GPT-3.5-turbo: 23.9 (#331)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashGPT-3.5-turbo
LMArena Coding15081136
DeepSWE63.4%—
FrontierCode31.8%—
CursorBench36.8%—
LMArena WebDev1609—
FrontierSWE18.1%—
SciCode51.6%—
WeirdML—3.5%
BigCodeBench Instruct—39.1%
BigCodeBench Complete—50.6%
ALE-Bench303.55—
HumanEval+—70.7%
MBPP+—69.7%

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 34.2 (#47), GPT-3.5-turbo: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashGPT-3.5-turbo
APEX-Agents52.8%—
GDP.pdf14%—
METR Time Horizons—21.5%

Reasoning GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 48.0 (#42), GPT-3.5-turbo: 13.8 (#332)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashGPT-3.5-turbo
Chess Puzzles14%0%
LMArena Hard Prompts14911108
Mystery Game Puzzles8%3%
Epoch Capabilities Index151.88118.55
ARC-AGI-265.8%—
ARC-AGI-191%—
CritPt15.4%—
DTBench—48.5%
LMCA—9.7%
Surface Evolver Bench52.5%—
Adversarial NLI—58.1%
Bench to the Future 30.15—
BIG-Bench Hard—61.6%
CommonsenseQA 2.0—57%
ForecastBench—50.4
WinoGrande—81.6%

Math GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 53.3 (#47), GPT-3.5-turbo: 6.3 (#327)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashGPT-3.5-turbo
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)55.8%0%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202593.9%2.2%
LMArena Math15001142
FrontierMath Tier 417.1%—
ProofBench21%—
MATH Level 5—15.9%
GSM8K—57.8%

Knowledge GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 58.4 (#36), GPT-3.5-turbo: 10.0 (#303)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashGPT-3.5-turbo
GPQA Diamond90.2%28%
LMArena Expert15131070
ARC (AI2) Challenge—87.4%
BoolQ—87%
MMLU—71.4%
OpenBookQA—86%
TriviaQA—85.8%

Multimodal Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 42.8 (#27), GPT-3.5-turbo: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashGPT-3.5-turbo
LMArena Vision1296—

Multilingual GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 56.0 (#25), GPT-3.5-turbo: 31.5 (#258)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashGPT-3.5-turbo
LMArena Non-English14621108
LMArena Chinese15271075
LMArena French14961118
LMArena German14701090
LMArena Japanese14291043
LMArena Korean14461019
LMArena Russian14691123
LMArena Spanish14711121

Instruction Following GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 77.5 (#20), GPT-3.5-turbo: 57.9 (#262)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashGPT-3.5-turbo
LMArena Instruction Following14781119

Long Context GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 45.4 (#39), GPT-3.5-turbo: 34.0 (#254)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashGPT-3.5-turbo
LMArena Longer Query14821121

Writing & Preference GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 65.3 (#50), GPT-3.5-turbo: 25.3 (#305)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashGPT-3.5-turbo
LMArena Text14711125
LMArena Creative Writing14421092
LMArena Multi-Turn14671117
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—451

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-5.3-Flash better than GPT-3.5-turbo?

GLM-5.3-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.8 to 23.2 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, GLM-5.3-Flash or GPT-3.5-turbo?

GLM-5.3-Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.50 per million output tokens; GPT-3.5-turbo lists at $0.50 and $1.50.

Is GLM-5.3-Flash or GPT-3.5-turbo better for coding?

GLM-5.3-Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 53.1 versus 23.9 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

GLM-5.3-Flash does, with 1M tokens against 16K.

How many benchmarks do GLM-5.3-Flash and GPT-3.5-turbo share?

23 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5.3-Flash has 40 scored results on Noometry and GPT-3.5-turbo has 44.

Related comparisons

Go deeper