Model comparison

GLM-5.3 vs Jamba Large

GLM-5.3 has enough public results to be ranked (#26); Jamba Large does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.

GLM-5.3 Z.ai (Zhipu)

54.8

Rank #26 Confirmed

Jamba Large AI21 Labs

33.1

Unranked Sparse

Summary

  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where GLM-5.3 leads 46.1 to 18.0.
  • GLM-5.3 is cheaper at $1.40 / $4.40 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $8 for Jamba Large.
  • GLM-5.3 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 256K.

Side by side

GLM-5.3 and Jamba Large specifications
GLM-5.3Jamba Large
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)AI21 Labs
Noometry Index54.833.1
Released2026-08-142025-07-01
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window1M256K
Max output131K4K
Input $ / M tokens$1.40$2
Output $ / M tokens$4.40$8
Results tracked422

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

GLM-5.3: 59.5 (#14), Jamba Large: —

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Jamba Large
DeepSWE69%—
FrontierCode40.1%—
CursorBench42.6%—
LMArena WebDev1622—
FrontierSWE30.2%—
SciCode59%—
WeirdML75.4%—
LMArena Coding1496—
ALE-Bench1,317—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GLM-5.3: 36.4 (#38), Jamba Large: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Jamba Large
APEX-Agents56.6%—
Vending-Bench 28,164—

Reasoning GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 46.1 (#46), Jamba Large: 18.0

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Jamba Large
Kagi LLM Benchmark—26.1%
NYT Connections (extended)74.2%—
CritPt19.1%—
Chess Puzzles21%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1489—
Mystery Game Puzzles33%—
DTBench87.7%—
LMCA55.5%—
Bench to the Future 30.15—
Epoch Capabilities Index155.61—

Math Not comparable

GLM-5.3: 62.3 (#33), Jamba Large: —

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Jamba Large
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)68.8%—
FrontierMath Tier 429.3%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202591.1%—
ProofBench49%—
LMArena Math1489—

Knowledge GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 58.3 (#37), Jamba Large: 37.7

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Jamba Large
GPQA Diamond90.9%—
SimpleQA Verified41%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate—9.7%
LMArena Expert1516—

Multilingual Not comparable

GLM-5.3: 55.7 (#28), Jamba Large: —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Jamba Large
LMArena Non-English1457—
LMArena Chinese1528—
LMArena French1499—
LMArena German1499—
LMArena Japanese1453—
LMArena Korean1472—
LMArena Russian1463—
LMArena Spanish1460—

Instruction Following Not comparable

GLM-5.3: 77.5 (#23), Jamba Large: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Jamba Large
LMArena Instruction Following1477—

Long Context Not comparable

GLM-5.3: 45.4 (#41), Jamba Large: —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Jamba Large
LMArena Longer Query1482—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

GLM-5.3: 75.7 (#6), Jamba Large: —

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Jamba Large
LMArena Text1471—
LMArena Creative Writing1457—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing2075—
LMArena Multi-Turn1472—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-5.3 better than Jamba Large?

GLM-5.3 has enough public results to be ranked (#26); Jamba Large does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Which is cheaper, GLM-5.3 or Jamba Large?

GLM-5.3 is cheaper. It lists at $1.40 per million input tokens and $4.40 per million output tokens; Jamba Large lists at $2 and $8.

Which has the bigger context window?

GLM-5.3 does, with 1M tokens against 256K.

How many benchmarks do GLM-5.3 and Jamba Large share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5.3 has 42 scored results on Noometry and Jamba Large has 2.

Related comparisons

Go deeper