Noometry

Model comparison

GLM-5.3-Flash vs Qwen-VL Max

GLM-5.3-Flash has enough public results to be ranked (#45); Qwen-VL Max does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.

GLM-5.3-Flash Z.ai (Zhipu)

49.6

Rank #45 Confirmed

Qwen-VL Max Alibaba (Qwen)

35.3

Unranked Sparse

Summary

  • They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. GLM-5.3-Flash scores higher in 1 category and Qwen-VL Max in 0 categories; one gap is clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in multimodal, where GLM-5.3-Flash leads 42.6 to 31.6.
  • GLM-5.3-Flash is cheaper at $0.15 / $0.50 per million input/output tokens, against $0.80 / $3.20 for Qwen-VL Max.
  • GLM-5.3-Flash accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 131K.
  • GLM-5.3-Flash has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GLM-5.3-FlashQwen-VL Max
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index49.635.3
Released2026-08-202024-01-18
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window1M131K
Max output131K8K
Input $ / M tokens$0.15$0.80
Output $ / M tokens$0.50$3.20
Results tracked363

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 53.7 (#26), Qwen-VL Max: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashQwen-VL Max
DeepSWE63.4%—
FrontierCode31.8%—
LMArena WebDev1614—
SciCode51.6%—
LMArena Coding1506—
ALE-Bench303.55—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 34.3 (#41), Qwen-VL Max: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashQwen-VL Max
APEX-Agents52.8%—
GDP.pdf14%—

Reasoning Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 31.7 (#69), Qwen-VL Max: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashQwen-VL Max
CritPt15.4%—
Chess Puzzles14%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1490—
Mystery Game Puzzles8%—
Surface Evolver Bench52.5%—
Bench to the Future 30.15—
Epoch Capabilities Index151.9—

Math Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 53.1 (#38), Qwen-VL Max: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashQwen-VL Max
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)55.8%—
FrontierMath Tier 417.1%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202593.9%—
ProofBench21%—
LMArena Math1499—

Knowledge Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 58.4 (#33), Qwen-VL Max: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashQwen-VL Max
GPQA Diamond90.2%—
LMArena Expert1512—

Multimodal GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 42.6 (#25), Qwen-VL Max: 31.6 (#97)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashQwen-VL Max
LMArena Vision13041212
Video-MME—51.3%
SpatialViz-Bench—32%

Multilingual Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 56.2 (#24), Qwen-VL Max: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashQwen-VL Max
LMArena Non-English1462—
LMArena Chinese1529—
LMArena French1495—
LMArena German1457—
LMArena Japanese1420—
LMArena Korean1443—
LMArena Russian1472—
LMArena Spanish1471—

Instruction Following Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 77.8 (#17), Qwen-VL Max: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashQwen-VL Max
LMArena Instruction Following1480—

Long Context Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 45.3 (#41), Qwen-VL Max: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashQwen-VL Max
LMArena Longer Query1479—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 65.4 (#49), Qwen-VL Max: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashQwen-VL Max
LMArena Text1471—
LMArena Creative Writing1440—
LMArena Multi-Turn1471—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-5.3-Flash better than Qwen-VL Max?

GLM-5.3-Flash has enough public results to be ranked (#45); Qwen-VL Max does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Which is cheaper, GLM-5.3-Flash or Qwen-VL Max?

GLM-5.3-Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.50 per million output tokens; Qwen-VL Max lists at $0.80 and $3.20.

Which has the bigger context window?

GLM-5.3-Flash does, with 1M tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks do GLM-5.3-Flash and Qwen-VL Max share?

1 benchmark has published results for both models. GLM-5.3-Flash has 36 scored results on Noometry and Qwen-VL Max has 3.

Related comparisons

Go deeper