Noometry

Model comparison

GLM-5.3-Flash vs o1-pro

GLM-5.3-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.8 to 31.5 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.

GLM-5.3-Flash Z.ai (Zhipu)

51.8

Rank #41 Confirmed

o1-pro OpenAI

31.5

Rank #271 Reported

Summary

  • They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. GLM-5.3-Flash scores higher in 2 categories and o1-pro in 0 categories; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where GLM-5.3-Flash leads 58.4 to 29.7.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is ARC-AGI-1: 91% for GLM-5.3-Flash and 23.3% for o1-pro.
  • GLM-5.3-Flash is cheaper at $0.15 / $0.50 per million input/output tokens, against $150 / $600 for o1-pro.
  • GLM-5.3-Flash accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 200K.
  • GLM-5.3-Flash has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GLM-5.3-Flasho1-pro
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)OpenAI
Noometry Index51.831.5
Released2026-08-202025-03-19
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window1M200K
Max output131K100K
Input $ / M tokens$0.15$150
Output $ / M tokens$0.50$600
Results tracked403

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 53.1 (#31), o1-pro: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-Flasho1-pro
DeepSWE63.4%—
FrontierCode31.8%—
CursorBench36.8%—
LMArena WebDev1609—
FrontierSWE18.1%—
SciCode51.6%—
LMArena Coding1508—
ALE-Bench303.55—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 34.2 (#47), o1-pro: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-Flasho1-pro
APEX-Agents52.8%—
GDP.pdf14%—

Reasoning GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 48.0 (#42), o1-pro: 20.4 (#239)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-Flasho1-pro
ARC-AGI-191%23.3%
ARC-AGI-265.8%—
CritPt15.4%—
Chess Puzzles14%—
EnigmaEval—6.1%
LMArena Hard Prompts1491—
Mystery Game Puzzles8%—
Surface Evolver Bench52.5%—
Bench to the Future 30.15—
Epoch Capabilities Index151.88—

Math Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 53.3 (#47), o1-pro: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-Flasho1-pro
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)55.8%—
FrontierMath Tier 417.1%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202593.9%—
ProofBench21%—
LMArena Math1500—

Knowledge GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 58.4 (#36), o1-pro: 29.7 (#234)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-Flasho1-pro
GPQA Diamond90.2%—
Humanity's Last Exam—8.1%
LMArena Expert1513—

Multimodal Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 42.8 (#27), o1-pro: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-Flasho1-pro
LMArena Vision1296—

Multilingual Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 56.0 (#25), o1-pro: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-Flasho1-pro
LMArena Non-English1462—
LMArena Chinese1527—
LMArena French1496—
LMArena German1470—
LMArena Japanese1429—
LMArena Korean1446—
LMArena Russian1469—
LMArena Spanish1471—

Instruction Following Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 77.5 (#20), o1-pro: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-Flasho1-pro
LMArena Instruction Following1478—

Long Context Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 45.4 (#39), o1-pro: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-Flasho1-pro
LMArena Longer Query1482—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 65.3 (#50), o1-pro: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-Flasho1-pro
LMArena Text1471—
LMArena Creative Writing1442—
LMArena Multi-Turn1467—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-5.3-Flash better than o1-pro?

GLM-5.3-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.8 to 31.5 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, GLM-5.3-Flash or o1-pro?

GLM-5.3-Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.50 per million output tokens; o1-pro lists at $150 and $600.

Which has the bigger context window?

GLM-5.3-Flash does, with 1M tokens against 200K.

How many benchmarks do GLM-5.3-Flash and o1-pro share?

1 benchmark has published results for both models. GLM-5.3-Flash has 40 scored results on Noometry and o1-pro has 3.

Related comparisons

Go deeper