Noometry

Model comparison

GLM-5.3-Flash vs Qwen3.5 Max Preview

GLM-5.3-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 49.6 to 44.7 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.

GLM-5.3-Flash Z.ai (Zhipu)

49.6

Rank #45 Confirmed

Qwen3.5 Max Preview Alibaba (Qwen)

44.7

Rank #72 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-5.3-Flash scores higher in 6 categories and Qwen3.5 Max Preview in 2 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where GLM-5.3-Flash leads 58.4 to 41.1.
  • GLM-5.3-Flash has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GLM-5.3-FlashQwen3.5 Max Preview
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index49.644.7
Released2026-08-20—
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window1M—
Max output131K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.15—
Output $ / M tokens$0.50—
Results tracked3617

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), Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 43.4 (#79)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashQwen3.5 Max Preview
LMArena Coding15061488
DeepSWE63.4%—
FrontierCode31.8%—
LMArena WebDev1614—
SciCode51.6%—
ALE-Bench303.55—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 34.3 (#41), Qwen3.5 Max Preview: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashQwen3.5 Max Preview
APEX-Agents52.8%—
GDP.pdf14%—

Reasoning GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 31.7 (#69), Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 29.6 (#81)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashQwen3.5 Max Preview
LMArena Hard Prompts14901483
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), Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 37.3 (#99)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashQwen3.5 Max Preview
LMArena Math14991473
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 (#33), Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 41.1 (#104)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashQwen3.5 Max Preview
LMArena Expert15121489
GPQA Diamond90.2%—

Multimodal Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 42.6 (#25), Qwen3.5 Max Preview: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashQwen3.5 Max Preview
LMArena Vision1304—

Multilingual Too close to call

GLM-5.3-Flash: 56.2 (#24), Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 56.4 (#21)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashQwen3.5 Max Preview
LMArena Non-English14621465
LMArena Chinese15291534
LMArena French14951483
LMArena German14571487
LMArena Japanese14201497
LMArena Korean14431438
LMArena Russian14721472
LMArena Spanish14711470

Instruction Following Too close to call

GLM-5.3-Flash: 77.8 (#17), Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 77.2 (#28)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashQwen3.5 Max Preview
LMArena Instruction Following14801467

Long Context Too close to call

GLM-5.3-Flash: 45.3 (#41), Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 45.2 (#44)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashQwen3.5 Max Preview
LMArena Longer Query14791477

Writing & Preference Too close to call

GLM-5.3-Flash: 65.4 (#49), Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 66.1 (#39)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashQwen3.5 Max Preview
LMArena Text14711471
LMArena Creative Writing14401464
LMArena Multi-Turn14711478

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-5.3-Flash better than Qwen3.5 Max Preview?

GLM-5.3-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 49.6 to 44.7 on the Noometry Index.

Is GLM-5.3-Flash or Qwen3.5 Max Preview better for coding?

GLM-5.3-Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 53.7 versus 43.4 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do GLM-5.3-Flash and Qwen3.5 Max Preview share?

17 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5.3-Flash has 36 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5 Max Preview has 17.

Related comparisons

Go deeper