# Command R7B vs GLM-5.3

> GLM-5.3 has enough public results to be ranked (#25); Command R7B does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/command-r7b-vs-glm-5-3
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 0

## Summary

- The widest gap is in agentic & tool use, where GLM-5.3 leads 36.3 to 25.9.
- Command R7B is cheaper at $0.0375 / $0.15 per million input/output tokens, against $1.40 / $4.40 for GLM-5.3.
- GLM-5.3 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 128K.

## Snapshot

| | Command R7B | GLM-5.3 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Cohere | Z.ai (Zhipu) |
| Noometry Index | 32.1 | 54.6 |
| Rank | — | 25 |
| Context | 128K | 1M |
| Input $/M | $0.0375 | $1.40 |
| Output $/M | $0.15 | $4.40 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Command R7B: —
- GLM-5.3: 59.0 (#12)

| Benchmark | Command R7B | GLM-5.3 |
|---|---|---|
| DeepSWE | — | 69% |
| FrontierCode | — | 40.1% |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1623 |
| FrontierSWE | — | 30.2% |
| SciCode | — | 59% |
| WeirdML | — | 75.4% |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1499 |
| ALE-Bench | — | 1,317 |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Command R7B: 25.9
- GLM-5.3: 36.3 (#34)

| Benchmark | Command R7B | GLM-5.3 |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | — | 56.6% |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 32.1% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 8,164 |

## Reasoning

- Command R7B: —
- GLM-5.3: 45.2 (#42)

| Benchmark | Command R7B | GLM-5.3 |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 74.2% |
| CritPt | — | 19.1% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 21% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1491 |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 33% |
| DTBench | — | 87.7% |
| LMCA | — | 55.5% |
| Bench to the Future 3 | — | 0.15 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 155.56 |

## Math

- Command R7B: —
- GLM-5.3: 62.1 (#27)

| Benchmark | Command R7B | GLM-5.3 |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 68.8% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 29.3% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 91.1% |
| ProofBench | — | 49% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1493 |

## Knowledge

- Command R7B: —
- GLM-5.3: 58.3 (#34)

| Benchmark | Command R7B | GLM-5.3 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 90.9% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 41% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1512 |

## Multilingual

- Command R7B: —
- GLM-5.3: 55.9 (#27)

| Benchmark | Command R7B | GLM-5.3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1457 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1523 |
| LMArena French | — | 1499 |
| LMArena German | — | 1505 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1438 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1478 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1460 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1444 |

## Instruction Following

- Command R7B: —
- GLM-5.3: 77.8 (#15)

| Benchmark | Command R7B | GLM-5.3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1481 |

## Long Context

- Command R7B: —
- GLM-5.3: 45.5 (#32)

| Benchmark | Command R7B | GLM-5.3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1485 |

## Writing & Preference

- Command R7B: —
- GLM-5.3: 75.9 (#6)

| Benchmark | Command R7B | GLM-5.3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1473 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1459 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 2075 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1473 |

## FAQ

### Is Command R7B better than GLM-5.3?

GLM-5.3 has enough public results to be ranked (#25); Command R7B does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

### Which is cheaper, Command R7B or GLM-5.3?

Command R7B is cheaper. It lists at $0.0375 per million input tokens and $0.15 per million output tokens; GLM-5.3 lists at $1.40 and $4.40.

### Which has the bigger context window?

GLM-5.3 does, with 1M tokens against 128K.

### How many benchmarks do Command R7B and GLM-5.3 share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Command R7B has 1 scored results on Noometry and GLM-5.3 has 41.