Noometry

Model comparison

GLM-5.3-Flash vs Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct

GLM-5.3-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 49.6 to 32.2 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 11 shared benchmarks.

GLM-5.3-Flash Z.ai (Zhipu)

49.6

Rank #45 Confirmed

Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)

32.2

Rank #248 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-5.3-Flash scores higher in 8 categories and Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where GLM-5.3-Flash leads 58.4 to 19.2.

Side by side

GLM-5.3-FlashOlmo 2 0325 32b Instruct
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)
Noometry Index49.632.2
Released2026-08-20—
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window1M—
Max output131K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.15—
Output $ / M tokens$0.50—
Results tracked3616

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: 53.7 (#26), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 34.6 (#222)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashOlmo 2 0325 32b Instruct
LMArena Coding15061210
DeepSWE63.4%—
FrontierCode31.8%—
LMArena WebDev1614—
SciCode51.6%—
ALE-Bench303.55—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 34.3 (#41), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashOlmo 2 0325 32b Instruct
APEX-Agents52.8%—
GDP.pdf14%—

Reasoning GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 31.7 (#69), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 22.6 (#174)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashOlmo 2 0325 32b Instruct
LMArena Hard Prompts14901208
CritPt15.4%—
Chess Puzzles14%—
Mystery Game Puzzles8%—
Surface Evolver Bench52.5%—
Bench to the Future 30.15—
Epoch Capabilities Index151.9—

Math GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 53.1 (#38), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 24.8 (#255)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashOlmo 2 0325 32b Instruct
LMArena Math14991208
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)55.8%—
FrontierMath Tier 417.1%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202593.9%—
ProofBench21%—
Omni-MATH—16.1%

Knowledge GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 58.4 (#33), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 19.2 (#274)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashOlmo 2 0325 32b Instruct
GPQA Diamond90.2%—
MMLU-Pro—41.4%
GPQA (HELM)—28.7%
LMArena Expert1512—

Multimodal Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 42.6 (#25), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashOlmo 2 0325 32b Instruct
LMArena Vision1304—

Multilingual GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 56.2 (#24), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 35.0 (#243)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashOlmo 2 0325 32b Instruct
LMArena Non-English14621160
LMArena Chinese15291192
LMArena Russian14721187
LMArena French1495—
LMArena German1457—
LMArena Japanese1420—
LMArena Korean1443—
LMArena Spanish1471—

Instruction Following GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 77.8 (#17), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 61.8 (#238)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashOlmo 2 0325 32b Instruct
LMArena Instruction Following14801186
IFEval—78%

Long Context GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 45.3 (#41), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 36.2 (#229)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashOlmo 2 0325 32b Instruct
LMArena Longer Query14791194

Writing & Preference GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 65.4 (#49), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 42.3 (#231)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashOlmo 2 0325 32b Instruct
LMArena Text14711218
LMArena Creative Writing14401199
LMArena Multi-Turn14711221
WildBench—73.4%

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-5.3-Flash better than Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct?

GLM-5.3-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 49.6 to 32.2 on the Noometry Index.

Is GLM-5.3-Flash or Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct better for coding?

GLM-5.3-Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 53.7 versus 34.6 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do GLM-5.3-Flash and Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct share?

11 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5.3-Flash has 36 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct has 16.

Related comparisons

Go deeper