Model comparison

GLM-5.3 vs Step 2 16k Exp 202412

GLM-5.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.8 to 39.2 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.

GLM-5.3 Z.ai (Zhipu)

54.8

Rank #26 Confirmed

Step 2 16k Exp 202412 StepFun

39.2

Rank #171 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-5.3 scores higher in 8 categories and Step 2 16k Exp 202412 in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where GLM-5.3 leads 62.3 to 36.3.
  • GLM-5.3 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GLM-5.3 and Step 2 16k Exp 202412 specifications
GLM-5.3Step 2 16k Exp 202412
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)StepFun
Noometry Index54.839.2
Released2026-08-14—
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window1M—
Max output131K—
Input $ / M tokens$1.40—
Output $ / M tokens$4.40—
Results tracked4212

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), Step 2 16k Exp 202412: 38.5 (#174)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Step 2 16k Exp 202412
LMArena Coding14961316
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), Step 2 16k Exp 202412: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Step 2 16k Exp 202412
APEX-Agents56.6%—
Vending-Bench 28,164—

Reasoning GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 46.1 (#46), Step 2 16k Exp 202412: 25.9 (#142)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Step 2 16k Exp 202412
LMArena Hard Prompts14891299
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), Step 2 16k Exp 202412: 36.3 (#169)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Step 2 16k Exp 202412
LMArena Math14891304
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), Step 2 16k Exp 202412: 35.2 (#187)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Step 2 16k Exp 202412
LMArena Expert15161279
GPQA Diamond90.9%—
SimpleQA Verified41%—

Multilingual GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 55.7 (#28), Step 2 16k Exp 202412: 43.7 (#181)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Step 2 16k Exp 202412
LMArena Non-English14571290
LMArena Chinese15281331
LMArena Russian14631324
LMArena French1499—
LMArena German1499—
LMArena Japanese1453—
LMArena Korean1472—
LMArena Spanish1460—

Instruction Following GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 77.5 (#23), Step 2 16k Exp 202412: 67.9 (#192)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Step 2 16k Exp 202412
LMArena Instruction Following14771287

Long Context GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 45.4 (#41), Step 2 16k Exp 202412: 39.7 (#170)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Step 2 16k Exp 202412
LMArena Longer Query14821307

Writing & Preference GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 75.7 (#6), Step 2 16k Exp 202412: 52.3 (#173)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Step 2 16k Exp 202412
LMArena Text14711321
LMArena Creative Writing14571328
LMArena Multi-Turn14721292
EQ-Bench Creative Writing2075—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-5.3 better than Step 2 16k Exp 202412?

GLM-5.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.8 to 39.2 on the Noometry Index.

Is GLM-5.3 or Step 2 16k Exp 202412 better for coding?

GLM-5.3 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 59.5 versus 38.5 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do GLM-5.3 and Step 2 16k Exp 202412 share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5.3 has 42 scored results on Noometry and Step 2 16k Exp 202412 has 12.

Related comparisons

Go deeper