Model comparison
ERNIE 5.1 vs GLM-5.3
GLM-5.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.8 to 43.8 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 18 shared benchmarks.
BaiduSummary
- They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. ERNIE 5.1 scores higher in 0 categories and GLM-5.3 in 8 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where GLM-5.3 leads 46.1 to 21.9.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is NYT Connections (extended): 23.4% for ERNIE 5.1 and 74.2% for GLM-5.3.
- GLM-5.3 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| ERNIE 5.1 | GLM-5.3 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Baidu | Z.ai (Zhipu) |
| Noometry Index | 43.8 | 54.8 |
| Released | — | 2026-08-14 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | 1M |
| Max output | — | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $1.40 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $4.40 |
| Results tracked | 19 | 42 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GLM-5.3 leads
ERNIE 5.1: 44.0 (#76), GLM-5.3: 59.5 (#14)
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | GLM-5.3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1488 | 1496 |
| DeepSWE | — | 69% |
| FrontierCode | — | 40.1% |
| CursorBench | — | 42.6% |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1622 |
| FrontierSWE | — | 30.2% |
| SciCode | — | 59% |
| WeirdML | — | 75.4% |
| ALE-Bench | — | 1,317 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
ERNIE 5.1: —, GLM-5.3: 36.4 (#38)
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | GLM-5.3 |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | — | 56.6% |
| LMArena Search | 1227 | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 8,164 |
Reasoning GLM-5.3 leads
ERNIE 5.1: 21.9 (#211), GLM-5.3: 46.1 (#46)
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | GLM-5.3 |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | 23.4% | 74.2% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1481 | 1489 |
| 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
ERNIE 5.1: 40.3 (#92), GLM-5.3: 62.3 (#33)
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | GLM-5.3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1481 | 1489 |
| 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
ERNIE 5.1: 41.9 (#102), GLM-5.3: 58.3 (#37)
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | GLM-5.3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1492 | 1516 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 90.9% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 41% |
Multilingual Too close to call
ERNIE 5.1: 55.5 (#29), GLM-5.3: 55.7 (#28)
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | GLM-5.3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1454 | 1457 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1508 | 1528 |
| LMArena French | 1488 | 1499 |
| LMArena German | 1470 | 1499 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1422 | 1453 |
| LMArena Korean | 1427 | 1472 |
| LMArena Russian | 1459 | 1463 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1473 | 1460 |
Instruction Following Too close to call
ERNIE 5.1: 76.7 (#37), GLM-5.3: 77.5 (#23)
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | GLM-5.3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1460 | 1477 |
Long Context Too close to call
ERNIE 5.1: 44.7 (#59), GLM-5.3: 45.4 (#41)
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | GLM-5.3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1462 | 1482 |
Writing & Preference GLM-5.3 leads
ERNIE 5.1: 65.1 (#52), GLM-5.3: 75.7 (#6)
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | GLM-5.3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1468 | 1471 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1441 | 1457 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1471 | 1472 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 2075 |
Frequently asked questions
Is ERNIE 5.1 better than GLM-5.3?
GLM-5.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.8 to 43.8 on the Noometry Index.
Is ERNIE 5.1 or GLM-5.3 better for coding?
GLM-5.3 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 59.5 versus 44.0 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do ERNIE 5.1 and GLM-5.3 share?
18 benchmarks have published results for both models. ERNIE 5.1 has 19 scored results on Noometry and GLM-5.3 has 42.