Model comparison
Claude 2 vs GLM-5.3-Flash
GLM-5.3-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.8 to 25.0 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 3 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 3 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude 2 scores higher in 0 categories and GLM-5.3-Flash in 3 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where GLM-5.3-Flash leads 53.3 to 9.3.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 2.5% for Claude 2 and 93.9% for GLM-5.3-Flash.
- GLM-5.3-Flash has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Claude 2 | GLM-5.3-Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Z.ai (Zhipu) |
| Noometry Index | 25.0 | 51.8 |
| Released | 2023-07-11 | 2026-08-20 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | 1M |
| Max output | — | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.15 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $0.50 |
| Results tracked | 8 | 40 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
Claude 2: —, GLM-5.3-Flash: 53.1 (#31)
| Benchmark | Claude 2 | GLM-5.3-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| DeepSWE | — | 63.4% |
| FrontierCode | — | 31.8% |
| CursorBench | — | 36.8% |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1609 |
| FrontierSWE | — | 18.1% |
| SciCode | — | 51.6% |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1508 |
| ALE-Bench | — | 303.55 |
| HumanEval+ | 61.6% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Claude 2: —, GLM-5.3-Flash: 34.2 (#47)
| Benchmark | Claude 2 | GLM-5.3-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | — | 52.8% |
| GDP.pdf | — | 14% |
Reasoning GLM-5.3-Flash leads
Claude 2: 21.7 (#216), GLM-5.3-Flash: 48.0 (#42)
| Benchmark | Claude 2 | GLM-5.3-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 120.13 | 151.88 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 65.8% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 91% |
| CritPt | — | 15.4% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 14% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1491 |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 8% |
| DTBench | 51.9% | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | — | 52.5% |
| Bench to the Future 3 | — | 0.15 |
Math GLM-5.3-Flash leads
Claude 2: 9.3 (#320), GLM-5.3-Flash: 53.3 (#47)
| Benchmark | Claude 2 | GLM-5.3-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 2.5% | 93.9% |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 55.8% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 17.1% |
| ProofBench | — | 21% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1500 |
| MATH Level 5 | 11.7% | — |
Knowledge GLM-5.3-Flash leads
Claude 2: 16.9 (#287), GLM-5.3-Flash: 58.4 (#36)
| Benchmark | Claude 2 | GLM-5.3-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 34.7% | 90.2% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1513 |
| MMLU | 78.5% | — |
| TriviaQA | 87.5% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Claude 2: —, GLM-5.3-Flash: 42.8 (#27)
| Benchmark | Claude 2 | GLM-5.3-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1296 |
Multilingual Not comparable
Claude 2: —, GLM-5.3-Flash: 56.0 (#25)
| Benchmark | Claude 2 | GLM-5.3-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| 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 Not comparable
Claude 2: —, GLM-5.3-Flash: 77.5 (#20)
| Benchmark | Claude 2 | GLM-5.3-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1478 |
Long Context Not comparable
Claude 2: —, GLM-5.3-Flash: 45.4 (#39)
| Benchmark | Claude 2 | GLM-5.3-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1482 |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Claude 2: —, GLM-5.3-Flash: 65.3 (#50)
| Benchmark | Claude 2 | GLM-5.3-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1471 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1442 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1467 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude 2 better than GLM-5.3-Flash?
GLM-5.3-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.8 to 25.0 on the Noometry Index.
How many benchmarks do Claude 2 and GLM-5.3-Flash share?
3 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude 2 has 8 scored results on Noometry and GLM-5.3-Flash has 40.