Model comparison

GLM-5.3 vs Wizardlm 70b

GLM-5.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.6 to 32.4 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.

GLM-5.3 Z.ai (Zhipu)

54.6

Rank #25 Confirmed

Wizardlm 70b Microsoft

32.4

Rank #245 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-5.3 scores higher in 7 categories and Wizardlm 70b in 0 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where GLM-5.3 leads 75.9 to 34.9.

Side by side

GLM-5.3 and Wizardlm 70b specifications
GLM-5.3Wizardlm 70b
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)Microsoft
Noometry Index54.632.4
Released2026-08-14—
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window1M—
Max output131K—
Input $ / M tokens$1.40—
Output $ / M tokens$4.40—
Results tracked4112

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), Wizardlm 70b: 30.9 (#280)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Wizardlm 70b
LMArena Coding14991081
DeepSWE69%—
FrontierCode40.1%—
LMArena WebDev1623—
FrontierSWE30.2%—
SciCode59%—
WeirdML75.4%—
ALE-Bench1,317—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GLM-5.3: 36.3 (#34), Wizardlm 70b: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Wizardlm 70b
APEX-Agents56.6%—
Vending-Bench 28,164—

Reasoning GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 45.2 (#42), Wizardlm 70b: 19.8 (#231)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Wizardlm 70b
LMArena Hard Prompts14911079
NYT Connections (extended)74.2%—
CritPt19.1%—
Chess Puzzles21%—
Mystery Game Puzzles33%—
DTBench87.7%—
LMCA55.5%—
Bench to the Future 30.15—
Epoch Capabilities Index155.56—

Math GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 62.1 (#27), Wizardlm 70b: 29.7 (#216)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Wizardlm 70b
LMArena Math14931116
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)68.8%—
FrontierMath Tier 429.3%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202591.1%—
ProofBench49%—

Knowledge Not comparable

GLM-5.3: 58.3 (#34), Wizardlm 70b: —

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Wizardlm 70b
GPQA Diamond90.9%—
SimpleQA Verified41%—
LMArena Expert1512—

Multilingual GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 55.9 (#27), Wizardlm 70b: 29.8 (#260)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Wizardlm 70b
LMArena Non-English14571078
LMArena Chinese15231052
LMArena German15051083
LMArena Russian14601155
LMArena French1499—
LMArena Japanese1438—
LMArena Korean1478—
LMArena Spanish1444—

Instruction Following GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 77.8 (#15), Wizardlm 70b: 56.5 (#268)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Wizardlm 70b
LMArena Instruction Following14811093

Long Context GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 45.5 (#32), Wizardlm 70b: 33.3 (#258)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Wizardlm 70b
LMArena Longer Query14851097

Writing & Preference GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 75.9 (#6), Wizardlm 70b: 34.9 (#264)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Wizardlm 70b
LMArena Text14731120
LMArena Creative Writing14591149
LMArena Multi-Turn14731108
EQ-Bench Creative Writing2075—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-5.3 better than Wizardlm 70b?

GLM-5.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.6 to 32.4 on the Noometry Index.

Is GLM-5.3 or Wizardlm 70b better for coding?

GLM-5.3 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 59.0 versus 30.9 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do GLM-5.3 and Wizardlm 70b share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5.3 has 41 scored results on Noometry and Wizardlm 70b has 12.

Related comparisons

Go deeper