Noometry

Model comparison

GLM-5.3-Flash vs GPT-6.1 Sol

GLM-5.3-Flash has enough public results to be ranked (#45); GPT-6.1 Sol does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Last verified . 2 shared benchmarks.

GLM-5.3-Flash Z.ai (Zhipu)

49.6

Rank #45 Confirmed

GPT-6.1 Sol OpenAI

42.1

Unranked Sparse

Summary

  • They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-5.3-Flash scores higher in 1 category and GPT-6.1 Sol in 1 category; one gap is clear of the uncertainty.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is GDP.pdf: 14% for GLM-5.3-Flash and 32% for GPT-6.1 Sol.
  • GLM-5.3-Flash is cheaper at $0.15 / $0.50 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $10 for GPT-6.1 Sol.
  • GPT-6.1 Sol accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.
  • GLM-5.3-Flash has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GLM-5.3-FlashGPT-6.1 Sol
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)OpenAI
Noometry Index49.642.1
Released2026-08-202026-09-29
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window1M1.05M
Max output131K128K
Input $ / M tokens$0.15$2
Output $ / M tokens$0.50$10
Results tracked362

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: 53.7 (#26), GPT-6.1 Sol: 51.4

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashGPT-6.1 Sol
DeepSWE63.4%75.2%
FrontierCode31.8%—
LMArena WebDev1614—
SciCode51.6%—
LMArena Coding1506—
ALE-Bench303.55—

Agentic & Tool Use Too close to call

GLM-5.3-Flash: 34.3 (#41), GPT-6.1 Sol: 34.3

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashGPT-6.1 Sol
GDP.pdf14%32%
APEX-Agents52.8%—

Reasoning Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 31.7 (#69), GPT-6.1 Sol: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashGPT-6.1 Sol
CritPt15.4%—
Chess Puzzles14%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1490—
Mystery Game Puzzles8%—
Surface Evolver Bench52.5%—
Bench to the Future 30.15—
Epoch Capabilities Index151.9—

Math Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 53.1 (#38), GPT-6.1 Sol: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashGPT-6.1 Sol
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)55.8%—
FrontierMath Tier 417.1%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202593.9%—
ProofBench21%—
LMArena Math1499—

Knowledge Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 58.4 (#33), GPT-6.1 Sol: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashGPT-6.1 Sol
GPQA Diamond90.2%—
LMArena Expert1512—

Multimodal Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 42.6 (#25), GPT-6.1 Sol: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashGPT-6.1 Sol
LMArena Vision1304—

Multilingual Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 56.2 (#24), GPT-6.1 Sol: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashGPT-6.1 Sol
LMArena Non-English1462—
LMArena Chinese1529—
LMArena French1495—
LMArena German1457—
LMArena Japanese1420—
LMArena Korean1443—
LMArena Russian1472—
LMArena Spanish1471—

Instruction Following Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 77.8 (#17), GPT-6.1 Sol: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashGPT-6.1 Sol
LMArena Instruction Following1480—

Long Context Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 45.3 (#41), GPT-6.1 Sol: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashGPT-6.1 Sol
LMArena Longer Query1479—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 65.4 (#49), GPT-6.1 Sol: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashGPT-6.1 Sol
LMArena Text1471—
LMArena Creative Writing1440—
LMArena Multi-Turn1471—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-5.3-Flash better than GPT-6.1 Sol?

GLM-5.3-Flash has enough public results to be ranked (#45); GPT-6.1 Sol does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Which is cheaper, GLM-5.3-Flash or GPT-6.1 Sol?

GLM-5.3-Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.50 per million output tokens; GPT-6.1 Sol lists at $2 and $10.

Is GLM-5.3-Flash or GPT-6.1 Sol better for coding?

GLM-5.3-Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 53.7 versus 51.4 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

GPT-6.1 Sol does, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.

How many benchmarks do GLM-5.3-Flash and GPT-6.1 Sol share?

2 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5.3-Flash has 36 scored results on Noometry and GPT-6.1 Sol has 2.

Related comparisons

Go deeper