Model comparison

GLM-5.3-Flash vs Qwen3 Max

GLM-5.3-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.8 to 43.7 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 24 shared benchmarks.

GLM-5.3-Flash Z.ai (Zhipu)

51.8

Rank #41 Confirmed

Qwen3 Max Alibaba (Qwen)

43.7

Rank #87 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 24 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-5.3-Flash scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen3 Max in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where GLM-5.3-Flash leads 48.0 to 22.6.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3): 55.8% for GLM-5.3-Flash and 18.9% for Qwen3 Max.
  • GLM-5.3-Flash is cheaper at $0.15 / $0.50 per million input/output tokens, against $1.20 / $6 for Qwen3 Max.
  • GLM-5.3-Flash accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 262K.
  • GLM-5.3-Flash has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GLM-5.3-Flash and Qwen3 Max specifications
GLM-5.3-FlashQwen3 Max
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index51.843.7
Released2026-08-202025-09-23
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window1M262K
Max output131K66K
Input $ / M tokens$0.15$1.20
Output $ / M tokens$0.50$6
Results tracked4033

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), Qwen3 Max: 43.0 (#93)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashQwen3 Max
LMArena Coding15081456
ALE-Bench303.55370.45
DeepSWE63.4%—
FrontierCode31.8%—
CursorBench36.8%—
LMArena WebDev1609—
FrontierSWE18.1%—
SciCode51.6%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 34.2 (#47), Qwen3 Max: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashQwen3 Max
APEX-Agents52.8%—
GDP.pdf14%—
Vending-Bench 2—71.56

Reasoning GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 48.0 (#42), Qwen3 Max: 22.6 (#190)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashQwen3 Max
Chess Puzzles14%4%
LMArena Hard Prompts14911448
Mystery Game Puzzles8%5%
Epoch Capabilities Index151.88142.38
ARC-AGI-265.8%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark—72.5%
NYT Connections (extended)—30.1%
ARC-AGI-191%—
CritPt15.4%—
DTBench—82.1%
LMCA—28.3%
Surface Evolver Bench52.5%—
Bench to the Future 30.15—

Math GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 53.3 (#47), Qwen3 Max: 38.7 (#131)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashQwen3 Max
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)55.8%18.9%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202593.9%73.3%
LMArena Math15001446
FrontierMath Tier 417.1%—
ProofBench21%—
MATH Level 5—97.1%

Knowledge GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 58.4 (#36), Qwen3 Max: 48.1 (#78)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashQwen3 Max
GPQA Diamond90.2%72.6%
LMArena Expert15131455
SimpleQA Verified—48.7%

Multimodal Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 42.8 (#27), Qwen3 Max: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashQwen3 Max
LMArena Vision1296—

Multilingual GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 56.0 (#25), Qwen3 Max: 53.7 (#62)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashQwen3 Max
LMArena Non-English14621429
LMArena Chinese15271478
LMArena French14961449
LMArena German14701463
LMArena Japanese14291397
LMArena Korean14461399
LMArena Russian14691428
LMArena Spanish14711462

Instruction Following GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 77.5 (#20), Qwen3 Max: 74.8 (#87)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashQwen3 Max
LMArena Instruction Following14781419

Long Context GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 45.4 (#39), Qwen3 Max: 41.6 (#134)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashQwen3 Max
LMArena Longer Query14821438
Fiction.LiveBench—66.7%
CL-bench—14.5%

Writing & Preference GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 65.3 (#50), Qwen3 Max: 62.4 (#76)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashQwen3 Max
LMArena Text14711439
LMArena Creative Writing14421402
LMArena Multi-Turn14671446

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-5.3-Flash better than Qwen3 Max?

GLM-5.3-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.8 to 43.7 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, GLM-5.3-Flash or Qwen3 Max?

GLM-5.3-Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.50 per million output tokens; Qwen3 Max lists at $1.20 and $6.

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

GLM-5.3-Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 53.1 versus 43.0 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

GLM-5.3-Flash does, with 1M tokens against 262K.

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

24 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5.3-Flash has 40 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 Max has 33.

Related comparisons

Go deeper