# GLM-5.3-Flash vs Qwen Plus

> GLM-5.3-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 49.6 to 36.7 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/glm-5-3-flash-vs-qwen-plus
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 15

## Summary

- They share 15 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-5.3-Flash scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen Plus in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where GLM-5.3-Flash leads 53.1 to 22.0.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 93.9% for GLM-5.3-Flash and 17.8% for Qwen Plus.
- GLM-5.3-Flash is cheaper at $0.15 / $0.50 per million input/output tokens, against $0.40 / $1.20 for Qwen Plus.
- GLM-5.3-Flash has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | GLM-5.3-Flash | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 49.6 | 36.7 |
| Rank | 45 | 204 |
| Context | 1M | 1M |
| Input $/M | $0.15 | $0.40 |
| Output $/M | $0.50 | $1.20 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |

## Coding

- GLM-5.3-Flash: 53.7 (#26)
- Qwen Plus: 38.3 (#163)

| Benchmark | GLM-5.3-Flash | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1506 | 1328 |
| DeepSWE | 63.4% | — |
| FrontierCode | 31.8% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1614 | — |
| SciCode | 51.6% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 303.55 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- GLM-5.3-Flash: 34.3 (#41)
- Qwen Plus: —

| Benchmark | GLM-5.3-Flash | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 52.8% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 14% | — |

## Reasoning

- GLM-5.3-Flash: 31.7 (#69)
- Qwen Plus: 27.6 (#101)

| Benchmark | GLM-5.3-Flash | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1490 | 1317 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 63.3% |
| CritPt | 15.4% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 14% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 8% | — |
| DTBench | — | 81.1% |
| LMCA | — | 24% |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 52.5% | — |
| Bench to the Future 3 | 0.15 | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 151.9 | — |

## Math

- GLM-5.3-Flash: 53.1 (#38)
- Qwen Plus: 22.0 (#266)

| Benchmark | GLM-5.3-Flash | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 93.9% | 17.8% |
| LMArena Math | 1499 | 1326 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 55.8% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 17.1% | — |
| ProofBench | 21% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 65.3% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 1.7% |

## Knowledge

- GLM-5.3-Flash: 58.4 (#33)
- Qwen Plus: 27.4 (#245)

| Benchmark | GLM-5.3-Flash | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 90.2% | 48.1% |
| LMArena Expert | 1512 | 1328 |

## Multimodal

- GLM-5.3-Flash: 42.6 (#25)
- Qwen Plus: —

| Benchmark | GLM-5.3-Flash | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1304 | — |

## Multilingual

- GLM-5.3-Flash: 56.2 (#24)
- Qwen Plus: 45.3 (#170)

| Benchmark | GLM-5.3-Flash | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1462 | 1310 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1529 | 1347 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1420 | 1251 |
| LMArena Russian | 1472 | 1323 |
| LMArena French | 1495 | — |
| LMArena German | 1457 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1443 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1471 | — |

## Instruction Following

- GLM-5.3-Flash: 77.8 (#17)
- Qwen Plus: 69.0 (#176)

| Benchmark | GLM-5.3-Flash | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1480 | 1303 |

## Long Context

- GLM-5.3-Flash: 45.3 (#41)
- Qwen Plus: 40.3 (#153)

| Benchmark | GLM-5.3-Flash | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1479 | 1325 |

## Writing & Preference

- GLM-5.3-Flash: 65.4 (#49)
- Qwen Plus: 52.4 (#171)

| Benchmark | GLM-5.3-Flash | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1471 | 1326 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1440 | 1293 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1471 | 1336 |

## FAQ

### Is GLM-5.3-Flash better than Qwen Plus?

GLM-5.3-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 49.6 to 36.7 on the Noometry Index.

### Which is cheaper, GLM-5.3-Flash or Qwen Plus?

GLM-5.3-Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.50 per million output tokens; Qwen Plus lists at $0.40 and $1.20.

### Is GLM-5.3-Flash or Qwen Plus better for coding?

GLM-5.3-Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 53.7 versus 38.3 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Both accept 1M tokens.

### How many benchmarks do GLM-5.3-Flash and Qwen Plus share?

15 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5.3-Flash has 36 scored results on Noometry and Qwen Plus has 20.