Noometry

Model comparison

GLM-5.3-Flash vs Muse Glimmer

GLM-5.3-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.8 to 41.7 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 15 shared benchmarks.

GLM-5.3-Flash Z.ai (Zhipu)

51.8

Rank #41 Confirmed

Muse Glimmer Meta

41.7

Rank #131 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 15 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-5.3-Flash scores higher in 8 categories and Muse Glimmer in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where GLM-5.3-Flash leads 48.0 to 25.7.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is CritPt: 15.4% for GLM-5.3-Flash and 2.6% for Muse Glimmer.

Side by side

GLM-5.3-FlashMuse Glimmer
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)Meta
Noometry Index51.841.7
Released2026-08-202026-08-10
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window1M—
Max output131K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.15—
Output $ / M tokens$0.50—
Results tracked4015

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), Muse Glimmer: 40.4 (#142)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashMuse Glimmer
LMArena WebDev16091355
SciCode51.6%44.9%
LMArena Coding15081416
DeepSWE63.4%—
FrontierCode31.8%—
CursorBench36.8%—
FrontierSWE18.1%—
ALE-Bench303.55—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 34.2 (#47), Muse Glimmer: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashMuse Glimmer
APEX-Agents52.8%—
GDP.pdf14%—

Reasoning GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 48.0 (#42), Muse Glimmer: 25.7 (#144)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashMuse Glimmer
CritPt15.4%2.6%
LMArena Hard Prompts14911396
ARC-AGI-265.8%—
ARC-AGI-191%—
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), Muse Glimmer: 38.8 (#125)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashMuse Glimmer
LMArena Math15001417
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), Muse Glimmer: 38.5 (#143)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashMuse Glimmer
LMArena Expert15131386
GPQA Diamond90.2%—

Multimodal Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 42.8 (#27), Muse Glimmer: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashMuse Glimmer
LMArena Vision1296—

Multilingual GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 56.0 (#25), Muse Glimmer: 50.5 (#122)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashMuse Glimmer
LMArena Non-English14621384
LMArena Chinese15271412
LMArena Russian14691390
LMArena French1496—
LMArena German1470—
LMArena Japanese1429—
LMArena Korean1446—
LMArena Spanish1471—

Instruction Following GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 77.5 (#20), Muse Glimmer: 72.6 (#135)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashMuse Glimmer
LMArena Instruction Following14781375

Long Context GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 45.4 (#39), Muse Glimmer: 42.1 (#129)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashMuse Glimmer
LMArena Longer Query14821382

Writing & Preference GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 65.3 (#50), Muse Glimmer: 57.5 (#126)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashMuse Glimmer
LMArena Text14711389
LMArena Creative Writing14421339
LMArena Multi-Turn14671399

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-5.3-Flash better than Muse Glimmer?

GLM-5.3-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.8 to 41.7 on the Noometry Index.

Is GLM-5.3-Flash or Muse Glimmer better for coding?

GLM-5.3-Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 53.1 versus 40.4 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do GLM-5.3-Flash and Muse Glimmer share?

15 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5.3-Flash has 40 scored results on Noometry and Muse Glimmer has 15.

Related comparisons

Go deeper