# GLM-5.3-Flash vs Ring-2.6-1T

> GLM-5.3-Flash has enough public results to be ranked (#41); Ring-2.6-1T does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/glm-5-3-flash-vs-ring-2-6-1t
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 3

## Summary

- They share 3 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-5.3-Flash scores higher in 2 categories and Ring-2.6-1T in 0 categories; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where GLM-5.3-Flash leads 48.0 to 26.1.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is CritPt: 15.4% for GLM-5.3-Flash and 3.7% for Ring-2.6-1T.

## Snapshot

| | GLM-5.3-Flash | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | Ant Group (inclusionAI) |
| Noometry Index | 51.8 | 36.9 |
| Rank | 41 | — |
| Context | 1M | — |
| Input $/M | $0.15 | — |
| Output $/M | $0.50 | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- GLM-5.3-Flash: 53.1 (#31)
- Ring-2.6-1T: 40.7

| Benchmark | GLM-5.3-Flash | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 51.6% | 42.4% |
| ALE-Bench | 303.55 | 432.57 |
| DeepSWE | 63.4% | — |
| FrontierCode | 31.8% | — |
| CursorBench | 36.8% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1609 | — |
| FrontierSWE | 18.1% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1508 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- GLM-5.3-Flash: 34.2 (#47)
- Ring-2.6-1T: —

| Benchmark | GLM-5.3-Flash | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 52.8% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 14% | — |

## Reasoning

- GLM-5.3-Flash: 48.0 (#42)
- Ring-2.6-1T: 26.1

| Benchmark | GLM-5.3-Flash | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 15.4% | 3.7% |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 65.8% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 91% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 14% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1491 | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 8% | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 52.5% | — |
| Bench to the Future 3 | 0.15 | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 151.88 | — |

## Math

- GLM-5.3-Flash: 53.3 (#47)
- Ring-2.6-1T: —

| Benchmark | GLM-5.3-Flash | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 55.8% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 17.1% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 93.9% | — |
| ProofBench | 21% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1500 | — |

## Knowledge

- GLM-5.3-Flash: 58.4 (#36)
- Ring-2.6-1T: —

| Benchmark | GLM-5.3-Flash | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 90.2% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1513 | — |

## Multimodal

- GLM-5.3-Flash: 42.8 (#27)
- Ring-2.6-1T: —

| Benchmark | GLM-5.3-Flash | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1296 | — |

## Multilingual

- GLM-5.3-Flash: 56.0 (#25)
- Ring-2.6-1T: —

| Benchmark | GLM-5.3-Flash | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1462 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1527 | — |
| LMArena French | 1496 | — |
| LMArena German | 1470 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1429 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1446 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1469 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1471 | — |

## Instruction Following

- GLM-5.3-Flash: 77.5 (#20)
- Ring-2.6-1T: —

| Benchmark | GLM-5.3-Flash | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1478 | — |

## Long Context

- GLM-5.3-Flash: 45.4 (#39)
- Ring-2.6-1T: —

| Benchmark | GLM-5.3-Flash | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1482 | — |

## Writing & Preference

- GLM-5.3-Flash: 65.3 (#50)
- Ring-2.6-1T: —

| Benchmark | GLM-5.3-Flash | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1471 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1442 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1467 | — |

## FAQ

### Is GLM-5.3-Flash better than Ring-2.6-1T?

GLM-5.3-Flash has enough public results to be ranked (#41); Ring-2.6-1T does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

### Is GLM-5.3-Flash or Ring-2.6-1T better for coding?

GLM-5.3-Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 53.1 versus 40.7 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do GLM-5.3-Flash and Ring-2.6-1T share?

3 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5.3-Flash has 40 scored results on Noometry and Ring-2.6-1T has 3.