Noometry

Model comparison

GLM-5.3-Flash vs Granite 3.1 2b Instruct

GLM-5.3-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.8 to 33.2 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.

GLM-5.3-Flash Z.ai (Zhipu)

51.8

Rank #41 Confirmed

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct IBM

33.2

Rank #247 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-5.3-Flash scores higher in 8 categories and Granite 3.1 2b Instruct in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where GLM-5.3-Flash leads 65.3 to 34.1.

Side by side

GLM-5.3-FlashGranite 3.1 2b Instruct
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)IBM
Noometry Index51.833.2
Released2026-08-20—
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window1M—
Max output131K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.15—
Output $ / M tokens$0.50—
Results tracked4012

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), Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 33.4 (#257)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashGranite 3.1 2b Instruct
LMArena Coding15081149
DeepSWE63.4%—
FrontierCode31.8%—
CursorBench36.8%—
LMArena WebDev1609—
FrontierSWE18.1%—
SciCode51.6%—
ALE-Bench303.55—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 34.2 (#47), Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashGranite 3.1 2b Instruct
APEX-Agents52.8%—
GDP.pdf14%—

Reasoning GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 48.0 (#42), Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 22.0 (#209)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashGranite 3.1 2b Instruct
LMArena Hard Prompts14911138
ARC-AGI-265.8%—
ARC-AGI-191%—
CritPt15.4%—
Chess Puzzles14%—
Mystery Game Puzzles8%—
Surface Evolver Bench52.5%—
Bench to the Future 30.15—
Epoch Capabilities Index151.88—

Math GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 53.3 (#47), Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 33.1 (#206)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashGranite 3.1 2b Instruct
LMArena Math15001159
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)55.8%—
FrontierMath Tier 417.1%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202593.9%—
ProofBench21%—

Knowledge GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 58.4 (#36), Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 30.8 (#224)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashGranite 3.1 2b Instruct
LMArena Expert15131131
GPQA Diamond90.2%—

Multimodal Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 42.8 (#27), Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashGranite 3.1 2b Instruct
LMArena Vision1296—

Multilingual GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 56.0 (#25), Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 29.1 (#269)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashGranite 3.1 2b Instruct
LMArena Non-English14621068
LMArena Chinese15271139
LMArena Russian14691063
LMArena French1496—
LMArena German1470—
LMArena Japanese1429—
LMArena Korean1446—
LMArena Spanish1471—

Instruction Following GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 77.5 (#20), Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 57.7 (#264)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashGranite 3.1 2b Instruct
LMArena Instruction Following14781116

Long Context GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 45.4 (#39), Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 35.0 (#244)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashGranite 3.1 2b Instruct
LMArena Longer Query14821155

Writing & Preference GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 65.3 (#50), Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 34.1 (#274)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashGranite 3.1 2b Instruct
LMArena Text14711127
LMArena Creative Writing14421116
LMArena Multi-Turn14671099

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-5.3-Flash better than Granite 3.1 2b Instruct?

GLM-5.3-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.8 to 33.2 on the Noometry Index.

Is GLM-5.3-Flash or Granite 3.1 2b Instruct better for coding?

GLM-5.3-Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 53.1 versus 33.4 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do GLM-5.3-Flash and Granite 3.1 2b Instruct share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5.3-Flash has 40 scored results on Noometry and Granite 3.1 2b Instruct has 12.

Related comparisons

Go deeper