Noometry

Model comparison

GLM-5.3-Flash vs Pixtral 12B

GLM-5.3-Flash has enough public results to be ranked (#41); Pixtral 12B 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

Pixtral 12B Mistral AI

31.3

Unranked Sparse

Summary

  • They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. GLM-5.3-Flash scores higher in 1 category and Pixtral 12B in 0 categories; one gap is clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in multimodal, where GLM-5.3-Flash leads 42.8 to 23.9.
  • Pixtral 12B is cheaper at $0.15 / $0.15 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-FlashPixtral 12B
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)Mistral AI
Noometry Index51.831.3
Released2026-08-202024-09-01
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window1M128K
Max output131K128K
Input $ / M tokens$0.15$0.15
Output $ / M tokens$0.50$0.15
Results tracked402

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), Pixtral 12B: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashPixtral 12B
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), Pixtral 12B: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashPixtral 12B
APEX-Agents52.8%—
GDP.pdf14%—

Reasoning Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 48.0 (#42), Pixtral 12B: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashPixtral 12B
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—
Epoch Capabilities Index151.88—

Math Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 53.3 (#47), Pixtral 12B: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashPixtral 12B
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)55.8%—
FrontierMath Tier 417.1%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202593.9%—
ProofBench21%—
LMArena Math1500—

Knowledge Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 58.4 (#36), Pixtral 12B: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashPixtral 12B
GPQA Diamond90.2%—
LMArena Expert1513—

Multimodal GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 42.8 (#27), Pixtral 12B: 23.9 (#127)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashPixtral 12B
LMArena Vision12961009
GeoBench—37%

Multilingual Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 56.0 (#25), Pixtral 12B: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashPixtral 12B
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), Pixtral 12B: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashPixtral 12B
LMArena Instruction Following1478—

Long Context Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 45.4 (#39), Pixtral 12B: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashPixtral 12B
LMArena Longer Query1482—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 65.3 (#50), Pixtral 12B: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashPixtral 12B
LMArena Text1471—
LMArena Creative Writing1442—
LMArena Multi-Turn1467—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-5.3-Flash better than Pixtral 12B?

GLM-5.3-Flash has enough public results to be ranked (#41); Pixtral 12B does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Which is cheaper, GLM-5.3-Flash or Pixtral 12B?

Pixtral 12B is cheaper. It lists at $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.15 per million output tokens; GLM-5.3-Flash lists at $0.15 and $0.50.

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 Pixtral 12B share?

1 benchmark has published results for both models. GLM-5.3-Flash has 40 scored results on Noometry and Pixtral 12B has 2.

Related comparisons

Go deeper