Noometry

Model comparison

GLM-5.3-Flash vs Grok 4.1

GLM-5.3-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.8 to 41.5 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 18 shared benchmarks.

GLM-5.3-Flash Z.ai (Zhipu)

51.8

Rank #41 Confirmed

Grok 4.1 xAI

41.5

Rank #134 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-5.3-Flash scores higher in 9 categories and Grok 4.1 in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in coding, where GLM-5.3-Flash leads 53.1 to 33.7.
  • GLM-5.3-Flash has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GLM-5.3-FlashGrok 4.1
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)xAI
Noometry Index51.841.5
Released2026-08-202025-11-17
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window1M—
Max output131K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.15—
Output $ / M tokens$0.50—
Results tracked4019

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), Grok 4.1: 33.7 (#253)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashGrok 4.1
LMArena WebDev16091214
LMArena Coding15081445
DeepSWE63.4%—
FrontierCode31.8%—
CursorBench36.8%—
FrontierSWE18.1%—
SciCode51.6%—
ALE-Bench303.55—

Agentic & Tool Use Too close to call

GLM-5.3-Flash: 34.2 (#47), Grok 4.1: 34.1 (#49)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashGrok 4.1
APEX-Agents52.8%—
Cybench—39%
GDP.pdf14%—

Reasoning GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 48.0 (#42), Grok 4.1: 29.5 (#91)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashGrok 4.1
LMArena Hard Prompts14911435
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), Grok 4.1: 38.9 (#120)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashGrok 4.1
LMArena Math15001422
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), Grok 4.1: 39.5 (#133)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashGrok 4.1
LMArena Expert15131417
GPQA Diamond90.2%—

Multimodal Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 42.8 (#27), Grok 4.1: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashGrok 4.1
LMArena Vision1296—

Multilingual GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 56.0 (#25), Grok 4.1: 53.4 (#68)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashGrok 4.1
LMArena Non-English14621425
LMArena Chinese15271465
LMArena French14961448
LMArena German14701446
LMArena Japanese14291397
LMArena Korean14461407
LMArena Russian14691434
LMArena Spanish14711438

Instruction Following GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 77.5 (#20), Grok 4.1: 73.8 (#111)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashGrok 4.1
LMArena Instruction Following14781400

Long Context GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 45.4 (#39), Grok 4.1: 43.2 (#100)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashGrok 4.1
LMArena Longer Query14821416

Writing & Preference GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 65.3 (#50), Grok 4.1: 62.4 (#75)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashGrok 4.1
LMArena Text14711437
LMArena Creative Writing14421411
LMArena Multi-Turn14671437

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-5.3-Flash better than Grok 4.1?

GLM-5.3-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.8 to 41.5 on the Noometry Index.

Is GLM-5.3-Flash or Grok 4.1 better for coding?

GLM-5.3-Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 53.1 versus 33.7 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do GLM-5.3-Flash and Grok 4.1 share?

18 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5.3-Flash has 40 scored results on Noometry and Grok 4.1 has 19.

Related comparisons

Go deeper