Model comparison

GLM-5.3 vs Llama 2-13B

GLM-5.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.6 to 29.1 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 20 shared benchmarks.

GLM-5.3 Z.ai (Zhipu)

54.6

Rank #25 Confirmed

Llama 2-13B Meta

29.1

Rank #304 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 20 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-5.3 scores higher in 8 categories and Llama 2-13B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where GLM-5.3 leads 75.9 to 30.0.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is DTBench: 87.7% for GLM-5.3 and 42.2% for Llama 2-13B.

Side by side

GLM-5.3 and Llama 2-13B specifications
GLM-5.3Llama 2-13B
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)Meta
Noometry Index54.629.1
Released2026-08-142023-07-18
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window1M—
Max output131K—
Input $ / M tokens$1.40—
Output $ / M tokens$4.40—
Results tracked4132

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

Category by category

Coding GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 59.0 (#12), Llama 2-13B: 30.4 (#287)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Llama 2-13B
LMArena Coding14991062
DeepSWE69%—
FrontierCode40.1%—
LMArena WebDev1623—
FrontierSWE30.2%—
SciCode59%—
WeirdML75.4%—
ALE-Bench1,317—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GLM-5.3: 36.3 (#34), Llama 2-13B: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Llama 2-13B
APEX-Agents56.6%—
Vending-Bench 28,164—

Reasoning GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 45.2 (#42), Llama 2-13B: 12.3 (#333)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Llama 2-13B
Chess Puzzles21%0%
LMArena Hard Prompts14911051
DTBench87.7%42.2%
Epoch Capabilities Index155.56105.8
NYT Connections (extended)74.2%—
CritPt19.1%—
Mystery Game Puzzles33%—
LMCA55.5%—
Bench to the Future 30.15—
BIG-Bench Hard—58.2%
HellaSwag—80.7%
LAMBADA—76.5%
PIQA—80.8%
WinoGrande—72.8%

Math GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 62.1 (#27), Llama 2-13B: 28.7 (#226)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Llama 2-13B
LMArena Math14931065
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)68.8%—
FrontierMath Tier 429.3%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202591.1%—
ProofBench49%—
GSM8K—36.9%

Knowledge GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 58.3 (#34), Llama 2-13B: 27.5 (#244)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Llama 2-13B
LMArena Expert15121030
GPQA Diamond90.9%—
SimpleQA Verified41%—
ARC (AI2) Challenge—60.3%
BoolQ—82.4%
MMLU—55.6%
OpenBookQA—57%
TriviaQA—79.6%

Multimodal Not comparable

GLM-5.3: —, Llama 2-13B: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Llama 2-13B
ScienceQA—55.8%

Multilingual GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 55.9 (#27), Llama 2-13B: 26.7 (#274)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Llama 2-13B
LMArena Non-English14571024
LMArena Chinese15231001
LMArena French14991043
LMArena German15051009
LMArena Japanese1438894
LMArena Korean1478953
LMArena Russian14601055
LMArena Spanish14441086

Instruction Following GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 77.8 (#15), Llama 2-13B: 53.5 (#282)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Llama 2-13B
LMArena Instruction Following14811046

Long Context GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 45.5 (#32), Llama 2-13B: 32.3 (#264)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Llama 2-13B
LMArena Longer Query14851064

Writing & Preference GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 75.9 (#6), Llama 2-13B: 30.0 (#284)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Llama 2-13B
LMArena Text14731085
LMArena Creative Writing14591047
LMArena Multi-Turn14731050
EQ-Bench Creative Writing2075—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-5.3 better than Llama 2-13B?

GLM-5.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.6 to 29.1 on the Noometry Index.

Is GLM-5.3 or Llama 2-13B better for coding?

GLM-5.3 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 59.0 versus 30.4 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do GLM-5.3 and Llama 2-13B share?

20 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5.3 has 41 scored results on Noometry and Llama 2-13B has 32.

Related comparisons

Go deeper