Noometry

Model comparison

GLM-5.3-Flash vs Qwen3.5 Plus

GLM-5.3-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 49.6 to 42.3 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 6 shared benchmarks.

GLM-5.3-Flash Z.ai (Zhipu)

49.6

Rank #45 Confirmed

Qwen3.5 Plus Alibaba (Qwen)

42.3

Rank #103 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 6 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-5.3-Flash scores higher in 3 categories and Qwen3.5 Plus in 1 category; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where GLM-5.3-Flash leads 58.4 to 46.0.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is Mystery Game Puzzles: 8% for GLM-5.3-Flash and 17% for Qwen3.5 Plus.
  • GLM-5.3-Flash is cheaper at $0.15 / $0.50 per million input/output tokens, against $0.40 / $2.40 for Qwen3.5 Plus.
  • GLM-5.3-Flash has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GLM-5.3-FlashQwen3.5 Plus
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index49.642.3
Released2026-08-202026-02-16
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window1M1M
Max output131K66K
Input $ / M tokens$0.15$0.40
Output $ / M tokens$0.50$2.40
Results tracked3615

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 53.7 (#26), Qwen3.5 Plus: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashQwen3.5 Plus
ALE-Bench303.55621.92
DeepSWE63.4%—
FrontierCode31.8%—
LMArena WebDev1614—
SciCode51.6%—
LMArena Coding1506—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 34.3 (#41), Qwen3.5 Plus: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashQwen3.5 Plus
APEX-Agents52.8%—
GDP.pdf14%—
Vending-Bench 2—0.54

Reasoning Too close to call

GLM-5.3-Flash: 31.7 (#69), Qwen3.5 Plus: 32.0 (#67)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashQwen3.5 Plus
Chess Puzzles14%22%
Mystery Game Puzzles8%17%
Epoch Capabilities Index151.9146.79
CritPt15.4%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1490—
DTBench—80.5%
LMCA—36.4%
Surface Evolver Bench52.5%—
Bench to the Future 30.15—

Math GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 53.1 (#38), Qwen3.5 Plus: 47.9 (#55)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashQwen3.5 Plus
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202593.9%86.7%
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)55.8%—
FrontierMath Tier 417.1%—
ProofBench21%—
LMArena Math1499—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)—21%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)—2.1%

Knowledge GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 58.4 (#33), Qwen3.5 Plus: 46.0 (#78)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashQwen3.5 Plus
GPQA Diamond90.2%84.8%
SimpleQA Verified—25.4%
Vectara Hallucination Rate—10.7%
LMArena Expert1512—

Multimodal Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 42.6 (#25), Qwen3.5 Plus: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashQwen3.5 Plus
LMArena Vision1304—

Multilingual Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 56.2 (#24), Qwen3.5 Plus: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashQwen3.5 Plus
LMArena Non-English1462—
LMArena Chinese1529—
LMArena French1495—
LMArena German1457—
LMArena Japanese1420—
LMArena Korean1443—
LMArena Russian1472—
LMArena Spanish1471—

Instruction Following Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 77.8 (#17), Qwen3.5 Plus: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashQwen3.5 Plus
LMArena Instruction Following1480—

Long Context GLM-5.3-Flash leads

GLM-5.3-Flash: 45.3 (#41), Qwen3.5 Plus: 42.9 (#109)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashQwen3.5 Plus
CL-bench—19.8%
CL-bench Life—12.4%
LMArena Longer Query1479—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

GLM-5.3-Flash: 65.4 (#49), Qwen3.5 Plus: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.3-FlashQwen3.5 Plus
LMArena Text1471—
LMArena Creative Writing1440—
LMArena Multi-Turn1471—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-5.3-Flash better than Qwen3.5 Plus?

GLM-5.3-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 49.6 to 42.3 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, GLM-5.3-Flash or Qwen3.5 Plus?

GLM-5.3-Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.50 per million output tokens; Qwen3.5 Plus lists at $0.40 and $2.40.

Which has the bigger context window?

Both accept 1M tokens.

How many benchmarks do GLM-5.3-Flash and Qwen3.5 Plus share?

6 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5.3-Flash has 36 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5 Plus has 15.

Related comparisons

Go deeper