Model comparison

DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024) vs GLM-5.3

GLM-5.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.8 to 37.6 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.

DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024) DeepSeek

37.6

Rank #200 Confirmed

GLM-5.3 Z.ai (Zhipu)

54.8

Rank #26 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024) scores higher in 0 categories and GLM-5.3 in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in coding, where GLM-5.3 leads 59.5 to 31.7.

Side by side

DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024) and GLM-5.3 specifications
DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024)GLM-5.3
ProviderDeepSeekZ.ai (Zhipu)
Noometry Index37.654.8
Released2024-09-062026-08-14
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window—1M
Max output—131K
Input $ / M tokens—$1.40
Output $ / M tokens—$4.40
Results tracked2242

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding GLM-5.3 leads

DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024): 31.7 (#281), GLM-5.3: 59.5 (#14)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024)GLM-5.3
LMArena Coding13091496
DeepSWE—69%
FrontierCode—40.1%
Aider Polyglot17.8%—
CursorBench—42.6%
LMArena WebDev—1622
FrontierSWE—30.2%
SciCode—59%
WeirdML—75.4%
BigCodeBench Instruct48.6%—
BigCodeBench Complete53.2%—
ALE-Bench—1,317
HumanEval+83.5%—
MBPP+74.1%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024): —, GLM-5.3: 36.4 (#38)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024)GLM-5.3
APEX-Agents—56.6%
Vending-Bench 2—8,164

Reasoning GLM-5.3 leads

DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024): 25.6 (#145), GLM-5.3: 46.1 (#46)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024)GLM-5.3
LMArena Hard Prompts12891489
NYT Connections (extended)—74.2%
CritPt—19.1%
Chess Puzzles—21%
Mystery Game Puzzles—33%
DTBench—87.7%
LMCA—55.5%
Bench to the Future 3—0.15
Epoch Capabilities Index—155.61

Math GLM-5.3 leads

DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024): 35.9 (#177), GLM-5.3: 62.3 (#33)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024)GLM-5.3
LMArena Math12881489
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—68.8%
FrontierMath Tier 4—29.3%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—91.1%
ProofBench—49%

Knowledge GLM-5.3 leads

DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024): 34.8 (#193), GLM-5.3: 58.3 (#37)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024)GLM-5.3
LMArena Expert12661516
GPQA Diamond—90.9%
SimpleQA Verified—41%

Multilingual GLM-5.3 leads

DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024): 42.5 (#193), GLM-5.3: 55.7 (#28)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024)GLM-5.3
LMArena Non-English12731457
LMArena Chinese13181528
LMArena French12891499
LMArena German12581499
LMArena Japanese12281453
LMArena Korean12091472
LMArena Russian12891463
LMArena Spanish12481460

Instruction Following GLM-5.3 leads

DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024): 67.5 (#194), GLM-5.3: 77.5 (#23)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024)GLM-5.3
LMArena Instruction Following12801477

Long Context GLM-5.3 leads

DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024): 39.5 (#174), GLM-5.3: 45.4 (#41)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024)GLM-5.3
LMArena Longer Query13011482

Writing & Preference GLM-5.3 leads

DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024): 49.8 (#187), GLM-5.3: 75.7 (#6)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024)GLM-5.3
LMArena Text12941471
LMArena Creative Writing12851457
LMArena Multi-Turn12971472
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—2075

Frequently asked questions

Is DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024) better than GLM-5.3?

GLM-5.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.8 to 37.6 on the Noometry Index.

Is DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024) or GLM-5.3 better for coding?

GLM-5.3 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 59.5 versus 31.7 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024) and GLM-5.3 share?

17 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024) has 22 scored results on Noometry and GLM-5.3 has 42.

Related comparisons

Go deeper