Model comparison

GLM-5.3-Flash vs Muse Glimmer

GLM-5.3-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 49.6 to 41.3 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 13 shared benchmarks.

GLM-5.3-Flash Z.ai (Zhipu)

49.6

Rank #45 Confirmed

Muse Glimmer Meta

41.3

Rank #128 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-5.3-Flash scores higher in 8 categories and Muse Glimmer in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where GLM-5.3-Flash leads 58.4 to 37.9.

Side by side

GLM-5.3-Flash and Muse Glimmer specifications
GLM-5.3-FlashMuse Glimmer
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)Meta
Noometry Index49.641.3
Released2026-08-20—
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window1M—
Max output131K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.15—
Output $ / M tokens$0.50—
Results tracked3613

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

Category by category

Coding GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 53.7 (#26), Muse Glimmer: 38.7 (#157)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashMuse Glimmer
LMArena WebDev16141355
LMArena Coding15061417
DeepSWE63.4%—
FrontierCode31.8%—
SciCode51.6%—
ALE-Bench303.55—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 34.3 (#41), Muse Glimmer: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashMuse Glimmer
APEX-Agents52.8%—
GDP.pdf14%—

Reasoning GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 31.7 (#69), Muse Glimmer: 27.2 (#111)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashMuse Glimmer
LMArena Hard Prompts14901395
CritPt15.4%—
Chess Puzzles14%—
Mystery Game Puzzles8%—
Surface Evolver Bench52.5%—
Bench to the Future 30.15—
Epoch Capabilities Index151.9—

Math GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 53.1 (#38), Muse Glimmer: 36.1 (#128)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashMuse Glimmer
LMArena Math14991419
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)55.8%—
FrontierMath Tier 417.1%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202593.9%—
ProofBench21%—

Knowledge GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 58.4 (#33), Muse Glimmer: 37.9 (#140)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashMuse Glimmer
LMArena Expert15121388
GPQA Diamond90.2%—

Multimodal Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 42.6 (#25), Muse Glimmer: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashMuse Glimmer
LMArena Vision1304—

Multilingual GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 56.2 (#24), Muse Glimmer: 50.6 (#117)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashMuse Glimmer
LMArena Non-English14621384
LMArena Chinese15291412
LMArena Russian14721393
LMArena French1495—
LMArena German1457—
LMArena Japanese1420—
LMArena Korean1443—
LMArena Spanish1471—

Instruction Following GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 77.8 (#17), Muse Glimmer: 72.7 (#134)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashMuse Glimmer
LMArena Instruction Following14801374

Long Context GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 45.3 (#41), Muse Glimmer: 42.1 (#124)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashMuse Glimmer
LMArena Longer Query14791381

Writing & Preference GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 65.4 (#49), Muse Glimmer: 57.7 (#122)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashMuse Glimmer
LMArena Text14711389
LMArena Creative Writing14401338
LMArena Multi-Turn14711398

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-5.3-Flash better than Muse Glimmer?

GLM-5.3-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 49.6 to 41.3 on the Noometry Index.

Is GLM-5.3-Flash or Muse Glimmer better for coding?

GLM-5.3-Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 53.7 versus 38.7 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do GLM-5.3-Flash and Muse Glimmer share?

13 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5.3-Flash has 36 scored results on Noometry and Muse Glimmer has 13.

Related comparisons

Go deeper