Model comparison

GLM-5.3 vs Hunyuan Turbos 20250226

GLM-5.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.8 to 41.3 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 16 shared benchmarks.

GLM-5.3 Z.ai (Zhipu)

54.8

Rank #26 Confirmed

Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 Tencent

41.3

Rank #139 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 16 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-5.3 scores higher in 8 categories and Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where GLM-5.3 leads 62.3 to 37.5.
  • GLM-5.3 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GLM-5.3 and Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 specifications
GLM-5.3Hunyuan Turbos 20250226
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)Tencent
Noometry Index54.841.3
Released2026-08-14—
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window1M—
Max output131K—
Input $ / M tokens$1.40—
Output $ / M tokens$4.40—
Results tracked4216

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

Category by category

Coding GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 59.5 (#14), Hunyuan Turbos 20250226: 40.0 (#152)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Hunyuan Turbos 20250226
LMArena Coding14961361
DeepSWE69%—
FrontierCode40.1%—
CursorBench42.6%—
LMArena WebDev1622—
FrontierSWE30.2%—
SciCode59%—
WeirdML75.4%—
ALE-Bench1,317—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GLM-5.3: 36.4 (#38), Hunyuan Turbos 20250226: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Hunyuan Turbos 20250226
APEX-Agents56.6%—
Vending-Bench 28,164—

Reasoning GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 46.1 (#46), Hunyuan Turbos 20250226: 27.8 (#113)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Hunyuan Turbos 20250226
LMArena Hard Prompts14891374
NYT Connections (extended)74.2%—
CritPt19.1%—
Chess Puzzles21%—
Mystery Game Puzzles33%—
DTBench87.7%—
LMCA55.5%—
Bench to the Future 30.15—
Epoch Capabilities Index155.61—

Math GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 62.3 (#33), Hunyuan Turbos 20250226: 37.5 (#154)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Hunyuan Turbos 20250226
LMArena Math14891359
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)68.8%—
FrontierMath Tier 429.3%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202591.1%—
ProofBench49%—

Knowledge GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 58.3 (#37), Hunyuan Turbos 20250226: 37.0 (#161)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Hunyuan Turbos 20250226
LMArena Expert15161339
GPQA Diamond90.9%—
SimpleQA Verified41%—

Multilingual GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 55.7 (#28), Hunyuan Turbos 20250226: 48.9 (#136)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Hunyuan Turbos 20250226
LMArena Non-English14571363
LMArena Chinese15281417
LMArena French14991391
LMArena German14991355
LMArena Japanese14531342
LMArena Korean14721351
LMArena Russian14631368
LMArena Spanish1460—

Instruction Following GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 77.5 (#23), Hunyuan Turbos 20250226: 71.0 (#158)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Hunyuan Turbos 20250226
LMArena Instruction Following14771344

Long Context GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 45.4 (#41), Hunyuan Turbos 20250226: 41.6 (#136)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Hunyuan Turbos 20250226
LMArena Longer Query14821366

Writing & Preference GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 75.7 (#6), Hunyuan Turbos 20250226: 57.4 (#128)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Hunyuan Turbos 20250226
LMArena Text14711377
LMArena Creative Writing14571359
LMArena Multi-Turn14721387
EQ-Bench Creative Writing2075—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-5.3 better than Hunyuan Turbos 20250226?

GLM-5.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.8 to 41.3 on the Noometry Index.

Is GLM-5.3 or Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 better for coding?

GLM-5.3 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 59.5 versus 40.0 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do GLM-5.3 and Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 share?

16 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5.3 has 42 scored results on Noometry and Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 has 16.

Related comparisons

Go deeper