Model comparison

GLM-5.3 vs Llama 2-13B

GLM-5.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.8 to 29.6 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 20 shared benchmarks.

GLM-5.3 Z.ai (Zhipu)

54.8

Rank #26 Confirmed

Llama 2-13B Meta

29.6

Rank #309 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 20 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-5.3 scores higher in 8 categories and Llama 2-13B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where GLM-5.3 leads 75.7 to 29.8.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is DTBench: 87.7% for GLM-5.3 and 42.2% for Llama 2-13B.

Side by side

GLM-5.3 and Llama 2-13B specifications
GLM-5.3Llama 2-13B
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)Meta
Noometry Index54.829.6
Released2026-08-142023-07-18
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window1M—
Max output131K—
Input $ / M tokens$1.40—
Output $ / M tokens$4.40—
Results tracked4232

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

Category by category

Coding GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 59.5 (#14), Llama 2-13B: 30.9 (#291)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Llama 2-13B
LMArena Coding14961062
DeepSWE69%—
FrontierCode40.1%—
CursorBench42.6%—
LMArena WebDev1622—
FrontierSWE30.2%—
SciCode59%—
WeirdML75.4%—
ALE-Bench1,317—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GLM-5.3: 36.4 (#38), Llama 2-13B: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Llama 2-13B
APEX-Agents56.6%—
Vending-Bench 28,164—

Reasoning GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 46.1 (#46), Llama 2-13B: 12.8 (#337)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Llama 2-13B
Chess Puzzles21%0%
LMArena Hard Prompts14891051
DTBench87.7%42.2%
Epoch Capabilities Index155.61106.17
NYT Connections (extended)74.2%—
CritPt19.1%—
Mystery Game Puzzles33%—
LMCA55.5%—
Bench to the Future 30.15—
BIG-Bench Hard—58.2%
HellaSwag—80.7%
LAMBADA—76.5%
PIQA—80.8%
WinoGrande—72.8%

Math GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 62.3 (#33), Llama 2-13B: 31.1 (#229)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Llama 2-13B
LMArena Math14891065
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)68.8%—
FrontierMath Tier 429.3%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202591.1%—
ProofBench49%—
GSM8K—36.9%

Knowledge GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 58.3 (#37), Llama 2-13B: 28.1 (#249)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Llama 2-13B
LMArena Expert15161030
GPQA Diamond90.9%—
SimpleQA Verified41%—
ARC (AI2) Challenge—60.3%
BoolQ—82.4%
MMLU—55.6%
OpenBookQA—57%
TriviaQA—79.6%

Multimodal Not comparable

GLM-5.3: —, Llama 2-13B: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Llama 2-13B
ScienceQA—55.8%

Multilingual GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 55.7 (#28), Llama 2-13B: 26.5 (#279)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Llama 2-13B
LMArena Non-English14571024
LMArena Chinese15281001
LMArena French14991044
LMArena German14991009
LMArena Japanese1453894
LMArena Korean1472953
LMArena Russian14631055
LMArena Spanish14601087

Instruction Following GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 77.5 (#23), Llama 2-13B: 53.3 (#287)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Llama 2-13B
LMArena Instruction Following14771045

Long Context GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 45.4 (#41), Llama 2-13B: 32.3 (#269)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Llama 2-13B
LMArena Longer Query14821064

Writing & Preference GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 75.7 (#6), Llama 2-13B: 29.8 (#289)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Llama 2-13B
LMArena Text14711084
LMArena Creative Writing14571047
LMArena Multi-Turn14721050
EQ-Bench Creative Writing2075—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-5.3 better than Llama 2-13B?

GLM-5.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.8 to 29.6 on the Noometry Index.

Is GLM-5.3 or Llama 2-13B better for coding?

GLM-5.3 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 59.5 versus 30.9 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do GLM-5.3 and Llama 2-13B share?

20 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5.3 has 42 scored results on Noometry and Llama 2-13B has 32.

Related comparisons

Go deeper