Noometry

Model comparison

GLM-5.3-Flash vs Olmo 7b Instruct

GLM-5.3-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.8 to 30.3 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 10 shared benchmarks.

GLM-5.3-Flash Z.ai (Zhipu)

51.8

Rank #41 Confirmed

Olmo 7b Instruct Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)

30.3

Rank #295 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 10 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-5.3-Flash scores higher in 6 categories and Olmo 7b Instruct in 0 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where GLM-5.3-Flash leads 65.3 to 25.8.

Side by side

GLM-5.3-FlashOlmo 7b Instruct
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)
Noometry Index51.830.3
Released2026-08-20—
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window1M—
Max output131K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.15—
Output $ / M tokens$0.50—
Results tracked4010

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), Olmo 7b Instruct: 29.6 (#303)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashOlmo 7b Instruct
LMArena Coding15081016
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), Olmo 7b Instruct: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashOlmo 7b Instruct
APEX-Agents52.8%—
GDP.pdf14%—

Reasoning GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 48.0 (#42), Olmo 7b Instruct: 18.8 (#274)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashOlmo 7b Instruct
LMArena Hard Prompts1491993
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), Olmo 7b Instruct: 30.2 (#237)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashOlmo 7b Instruct
LMArena Math15001018
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)55.8%—
FrontierMath Tier 417.1%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202593.9%—
ProofBench21%—

Knowledge Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 58.4 (#36), Olmo 7b Instruct: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashOlmo 7b Instruct
GPQA Diamond90.2%—
LMArena Expert1513—

Multimodal Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 42.8 (#27), Olmo 7b Instruct: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashOlmo 7b Instruct
LMArena Vision1296—

Multilingual GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 56.0 (#25), Olmo 7b Instruct: 24.0 (#291)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashOlmo 7b Instruct
LMArena Non-English1462977
LMArena Chinese15271014
LMArena Russian1469947
LMArena French1496—
LMArena German1470—
LMArena Japanese1429—
LMArena Korean1446—
LMArena Spanish1471—

Instruction Following GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 77.5 (#20), Olmo 7b Instruct: 49.0 (#301)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashOlmo 7b Instruct
LMArena Instruction Following1478978

Long Context Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 45.4 (#39), Olmo 7b Instruct: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashOlmo 7b Instruct
LMArena Longer Query1482—

Writing & Preference GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 65.3 (#50), Olmo 7b Instruct: 25.8 (#303)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashOlmo 7b Instruct
LMArena Text14711032
LMArena Creative Writing1442990
LMArena Multi-Turn14671007

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-5.3-Flash better than Olmo 7b Instruct?

GLM-5.3-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.8 to 30.3 on the Noometry Index.

Is GLM-5.3-Flash or Olmo 7b Instruct better for coding?

GLM-5.3-Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 53.1 versus 29.6 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do GLM-5.3-Flash and Olmo 7b Instruct share?

10 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5.3-Flash has 40 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 7b Instruct has 10.

Related comparisons

Go deeper