Model comparison
GLM-5.3-Flash vs Phi-4 Mini
GLM-5.3-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.8 to 30.9 on the Noometry Index. Phi-4 Mini costs 1.8× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-5.3-Flash's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 2 shared benchmarks.
MicrosoftSummary
- They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-5.3-Flash scores higher in 3 categories and Phi-4 Mini in 0 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where GLM-5.3-Flash leads 58.4 to 25.3.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is SciCode: 51.6% for GLM-5.3-Flash and 10.8% for Phi-4 Mini.
- Phi-4 Mini is cheaper at $0.075 / $0.30 per million input/output tokens, against $0.15 / $0.50 for GLM-5.3-Flash.
- GLM-5.3-Flash accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 128K.
Side by side
| GLM-5.3-Flash | Phi-4 Mini | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | Microsoft |
| Noometry Index | 51.8 | 30.9 |
| Released | 2026-08-20 | 2024-12-11 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 1M | 128K |
| Max output | 131K | 4K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.15 | $0.075 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.50 | $0.30 |
| Results tracked | 40 | 3 |
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: 53.1 (#31), Phi-4 Mini: 28.1 (#317)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.3-Flash | Phi-4 Mini |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 51.6% | 10.8% |
| DeepSWE | 63.4% | — |
| FrontierCode | 31.8% | — |
| CursorBench | 36.8% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1609 | — |
| FrontierSWE | 18.1% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1508 | — |
| ALE-Bench | 303.55 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
GLM-5.3-Flash: 34.2 (#47), Phi-4 Mini: —
| Benchmark | GLM-5.3-Flash | Phi-4 Mini |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 52.8% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 14% | — |
Reasoning GLM-5.3-Flash leads
GLM-5.3-Flash: 48.0 (#42), Phi-4 Mini: 22.4 (#195)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.3-Flash | Phi-4 Mini |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 15.4% | 0% |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 65.8% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 91% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 14% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1491 | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 8% | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 52.5% | — |
| Bench to the Future 3 | 0.15 | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 151.88 | — |
Math Not comparable
GLM-5.3-Flash: 53.3 (#47), Phi-4 Mini: —
| Benchmark | GLM-5.3-Flash | Phi-4 Mini |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 55.8% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 17.1% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 93.9% | — |
| ProofBench | 21% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1500 | — |
Knowledge GLM-5.3-Flash leads
GLM-5.3-Flash: 58.4 (#36), Phi-4 Mini: 25.3 (#262)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.3-Flash | Phi-4 Mini |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 90.2% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 23.5% |
| LMArena Expert | 1513 | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
GLM-5.3-Flash: 42.8 (#27), Phi-4 Mini: —
| Benchmark | GLM-5.3-Flash | Phi-4 Mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1296 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
GLM-5.3-Flash: 56.0 (#25), Phi-4 Mini: —
| Benchmark | GLM-5.3-Flash | Phi-4 Mini |
|---|---|---|
| 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
GLM-5.3-Flash: 77.5 (#20), Phi-4 Mini: —
| Benchmark | GLM-5.3-Flash | Phi-4 Mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1478 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
GLM-5.3-Flash: 45.4 (#39), Phi-4 Mini: —
| Benchmark | GLM-5.3-Flash | Phi-4 Mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1482 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
GLM-5.3-Flash: 65.3 (#50), Phi-4 Mini: —
| Benchmark | GLM-5.3-Flash | Phi-4 Mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1471 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1442 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1467 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is GLM-5.3-Flash better than Phi-4 Mini?
GLM-5.3-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.8 to 30.9 on the Noometry Index. Phi-4 Mini costs 1.8× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-5.3-Flash's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, GLM-5.3-Flash or Phi-4 Mini?
Phi-4 Mini is cheaper. It lists at $0.075 per million input tokens and $0.30 per million output tokens; GLM-5.3-Flash lists at $0.15 and $0.50.
Is GLM-5.3-Flash or Phi-4 Mini better for coding?
GLM-5.3-Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 53.1 versus 28.1 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
GLM-5.3-Flash does, with 1M tokens against 128K.
How many benchmarks do GLM-5.3-Flash and Phi-4 Mini share?
2 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5.3-Flash has 40 scored results on Noometry and Phi-4 Mini has 3.