# Claude 2.1 vs GLM-5.3

> GLM-5.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.8 to 25.2 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/claude-2-1-vs-glm-5-3
- Last updated: 2026-10-12
- Shared benchmarks: 5

## Summary

- They share 5 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude 2.1 scores higher in 0 categories and GLM-5.3 in 4 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where GLM-5.3 leads 62.3 to 10.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 1.9% for Claude 2.1 and 91.1% for GLM-5.3.
- GLM-5.3 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Claude 2.1 | GLM-5.3 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Z.ai (Zhipu) |
| Noometry Index | 25.2 | 54.8 |
| Rank | 345 | 26 |
| Context | — | 1M |
| Input $/M | — | $1.40 |
| Output $/M | — | $4.40 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Claude 2.1: 26.2 (#327)
- GLM-5.3: 59.5 (#14)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | GLM-5.3 |
|---|---|---|
| WeirdML | 7.1% | 75.4% |
| DeepSWE | — | 69% |
| FrontierCode | — | 40.1% |
| CursorBench | — | 42.6% |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1622 |
| FrontierSWE | — | 30.2% |
| SciCode | — | 59% |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1496 |
| ALE-Bench | — | 1,317 |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Claude 2.1: —
- GLM-5.3: 36.4 (#38)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | GLM-5.3 |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | — | 56.6% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 8,164 |

## Reasoning

- Claude 2.1: 21.4 (#221)
- GLM-5.3: 46.1 (#46)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | GLM-5.3 |
|---|---|---|
| DTBench | 51% | 87.7% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 119.27 | 155.61 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 74.2% |
| CritPt | — | 19.1% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 21% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1489 |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 33% |
| LMCA | — | 55.5% |
| Bench to the Future 3 | — | 0.15 |
| ForecastBench | 54.2 | — |

## Math

- Claude 2.1: 10.2 (#315)
- GLM-5.3: 62.3 (#33)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | GLM-5.3 |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 1.9% | 91.1% |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 68.8% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 29.3% |
| ProofBench | — | 49% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1489 |

## Knowledge

- Claude 2.1: 15.4 (#292)
- GLM-5.3: 58.3 (#37)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | GLM-5.3 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 33% | 90.9% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 41% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1516 |
| MMLU | 73.5% | — |

## Multilingual

- Claude 2.1: —
- GLM-5.3: 55.7 (#28)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | GLM-5.3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1457 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1528 |
| LMArena French | — | 1499 |
| LMArena German | — | 1499 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1453 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1472 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1463 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1460 |

## Instruction Following

- Claude 2.1: —
- GLM-5.3: 77.5 (#23)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | GLM-5.3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1477 |

## Long Context

- Claude 2.1: —
- GLM-5.3: 45.4 (#41)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | GLM-5.3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1482 |

## Writing & Preference

- Claude 2.1: —
- GLM-5.3: 75.7 (#6)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | GLM-5.3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1471 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1457 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 2075 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1472 |

## FAQ

### Is Claude 2.1 better than GLM-5.3?

GLM-5.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.8 to 25.2 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Claude 2.1 or GLM-5.3 better for coding?

GLM-5.3 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 59.5 versus 26.2 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Claude 2.1 and GLM-5.3 share?

5 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude 2.1 has 7 scored results on Noometry and GLM-5.3 has 42.