Noometry

Model comparison

GLM-5.3-Flash vs Llama 2-13B

GLM-5.3-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.8 to 29.6 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 19 shared benchmarks.

GLM-5.3-Flash Z.ai (Zhipu)

51.8

Rank #41 Confirmed

Llama 2-13B Meta

29.6

Rank #309 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 19 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-5.3-Flash scores higher in 8 categories and Llama 2-13B 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 29.8.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is Chess Puzzles: 14% for GLM-5.3-Flash and 0% for Llama 2-13B.

Side by side

GLM-5.3-FlashLlama 2-13B
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)Meta
Noometry Index51.829.6
Released2026-08-202023-07-18
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window1M—
Max output131K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.15—
Output $ / M tokens$0.50—
Results tracked4032

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), Llama 2-13B: 30.9 (#291)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashLlama 2-13B
LMArena Coding15081062
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), Llama 2-13B: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashLlama 2-13B
APEX-Agents52.8%—
GDP.pdf14%—

Reasoning GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 48.0 (#42), Llama 2-13B: 12.8 (#337)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashLlama 2-13B
Chess Puzzles14%0%
LMArena Hard Prompts14911051
Epoch Capabilities Index151.88106.17
ARC-AGI-265.8%—
ARC-AGI-191%—
CritPt15.4%—
Mystery Game Puzzles8%—
DTBench—42.2%
Surface Evolver Bench52.5%—
Bench to the Future 30.15—
BIG-Bench Hard—58.2%
HellaSwag—80.7%
LAMBADA—76.5%
PIQA—80.8%
WinoGrande—72.8%

Math GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 53.3 (#47), Llama 2-13B: 31.1 (#229)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashLlama 2-13B
LMArena Math15001065
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)55.8%—
FrontierMath Tier 417.1%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202593.9%—
ProofBench21%—
GSM8K—36.9%

Knowledge GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 58.4 (#36), Llama 2-13B: 28.1 (#249)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashLlama 2-13B
LMArena Expert15131030
GPQA Diamond90.2%—
ARC (AI2) Challenge—60.3%
BoolQ—82.4%
MMLU—55.6%
OpenBookQA—57%
TriviaQA—79.6%

Multimodal Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 42.8 (#27), Llama 2-13B: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashLlama 2-13B
LMArena Vision1296—
ScienceQA—55.8%

Multilingual GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 56.0 (#25), Llama 2-13B: 26.5 (#279)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashLlama 2-13B
LMArena Non-English14621024
LMArena Chinese15271001
LMArena French14961044
LMArena German14701009
LMArena Japanese1429894
LMArena Korean1446953
LMArena Russian14691055
LMArena Spanish14711087

Instruction Following GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 77.5 (#20), Llama 2-13B: 53.3 (#287)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashLlama 2-13B
LMArena Instruction Following14781045

Long Context GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 45.4 (#39), Llama 2-13B: 32.3 (#269)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashLlama 2-13B
LMArena Longer Query14821064

Writing & Preference GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 65.3 (#50), Llama 2-13B: 29.8 (#289)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashLlama 2-13B
LMArena Text14711084
LMArena Creative Writing14421047
LMArena Multi-Turn14671050

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-5.3-Flash better than Llama 2-13B?

GLM-5.3-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.8 to 29.6 on the Noometry Index.

Is GLM-5.3-Flash or Llama 2-13B better for coding?

GLM-5.3-Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 53.1 versus 30.9 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do GLM-5.3-Flash and Llama 2-13B share?

19 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5.3-Flash has 40 scored results on Noometry and Llama 2-13B has 32.

Related comparisons

Go deeper