Model comparison

GLM-5.3-Flash vs Llama 2-34B

GLM-5.3-Flash has enough public results to be ranked (#41); Llama 2-34B does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.

GLM-5.3-Flash Z.ai (Zhipu)

51.8

Rank #41 Confirmed

Llama 2-34B Meta

—

Unranked

Summary

  • They share 1 benchmark with published results for both.
  • GLM-5.3-Flash has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GLM-5.3-Flash and Llama 2-34B specifications
GLM-5.3-FlashLlama 2-34B
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)Meta
Noometry Index51.8—
Released2026-08-202023-07-18
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window1M—
Max output131K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.15—
Output $ / M tokens$0.50—
Results tracked4010

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 53.1 (#31), Llama 2-34B: —

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashLlama 2-34B
DeepSWE63.4%—
FrontierCode31.8%—
CursorBench36.8%—
LMArena WebDev1609—
FrontierSWE18.1%—
SciCode51.6%—
LMArena Coding1508—
ALE-Bench303.55—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 34.2 (#47), Llama 2-34B: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashLlama 2-34B
APEX-Agents52.8%—
GDP.pdf14%—

Reasoning Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 48.0 (#42), Llama 2-34B: —

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashLlama 2-34B
Epoch Capabilities Index151.88105.2
ARC-AGI-265.8%—
ARC-AGI-191%—
CritPt15.4%—
Chess Puzzles14%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1491—
Mystery Game Puzzles8%—
Surface Evolver Bench52.5%—
Bench to the Future 30.15—
BIG-Bench Hard—44.1%
PIQA—81.9%
WinoGrande—76.7%

Math Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 53.3 (#47), Llama 2-34B: —

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashLlama 2-34B
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)55.8%—
FrontierMath Tier 417.1%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202593.9%—
ProofBench21%—
LMArena Math1500—
GSM8K—42.2%

Knowledge Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 58.4 (#36), Llama 2-34B: —

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashLlama 2-34B
GPQA Diamond90.2%—
LMArena Expert1513—
ARC (AI2) Challenge—54.5%
BoolQ—83.7%
MMLU—62.6%
OpenBookQA—58.2%
TriviaQA—84.6%

Multimodal Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 42.8 (#27), Llama 2-34B: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashLlama 2-34B
LMArena Vision1296—

Multilingual Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 56.0 (#25), Llama 2-34B: —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashLlama 2-34B
LMArena Non-English1462—
LMArena Chinese1527—
LMArena French1496—
LMArena German1470—
LMArena Japanese1429—
LMArena Korean1446—
LMArena Russian1469—
LMArena Spanish1471—

Instruction Following Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 77.5 (#20), Llama 2-34B: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashLlama 2-34B
LMArena Instruction Following1478—

Long Context Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 45.4 (#39), Llama 2-34B: —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashLlama 2-34B
LMArena Longer Query1482—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 65.3 (#50), Llama 2-34B: —

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashLlama 2-34B
LMArena Text1471—
LMArena Creative Writing1442—
LMArena Multi-Turn1467—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-5.3-Flash better than Llama 2-34B?

GLM-5.3-Flash has enough public results to be ranked (#41); Llama 2-34B does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

How many benchmarks do GLM-5.3-Flash and Llama 2-34B share?

1 benchmark has published results for both models. GLM-5.3-Flash has 40 scored results on Noometry and Llama 2-34B has 10.

Related comparisons

Go deeper