Model comparison

GLM-5.3 vs Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct

GLM-5.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.8 to 35.9 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.

GLM-5.3 Z.ai (Zhipu)

54.8

Rank #26 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-5.3 scores higher in 8 categories and Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct 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 43.4.

Side by side

GLM-5.3 and Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct specifications
GLM-5.3Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)NVIDIA
Noometry Index54.835.9
Released2026-08-14—
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window1M—
Max output131K—
Input $ / M tokens$1.40—
Output $ / M tokens$4.40—
Results tracked4212

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 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct: 35.6 (#222)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct
LMArena Coding14961223
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 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct
APEX-Agents56.6%—
Vending-Bench 28,164—

Reasoning GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 46.1 (#46), Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct: 23.5 (#177)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct
LMArena Hard Prompts14891203
NYT Connections (extended)74.2%—
CritPt19.1%—
Chess Puzzles21%—
Mystery Game Puzzles33%—
DTBench87.7%—
LMCA55.5%—
Bench to the Future 30.15—
Epoch Capabilities Index155.61—

Math GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 62.3 (#33), Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct: 34.6 (#193)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct
LMArena Math14891230
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)68.8%—
FrontierMath Tier 429.3%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202591.1%—
ProofBench49%—

Knowledge GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 58.3 (#37), Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct: 31.9 (#218)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct
LMArena Expert15161167
GPQA Diamond90.9%—
SimpleQA Verified41%—

Multilingual GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 55.7 (#28), Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct: 36.1 (#241)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct
LMArena Non-English14571181
LMArena Chinese15281180
LMArena Russian14631187
LMArena French1499—
LMArena German1499—
LMArena Japanese1453—
LMArena Korean1472—
LMArena Spanish1460—

Instruction Following GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 77.5 (#23), Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct: 62.9 (#233)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct
LMArena Instruction Following14771201

Long Context GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 45.4 (#41), Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct: 36.5 (#230)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct
LMArena Longer Query14821205

Writing & Preference GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 75.7 (#6), Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct: 43.4 (#229)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct
LMArena Text14711228
LMArena Creative Writing14571213
LMArena Multi-Turn14721227
EQ-Bench Creative Writing2075—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-5.3 better than Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct?

GLM-5.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.8 to 35.9 on the Noometry Index.

Is GLM-5.3 or Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct better for coding?

GLM-5.3 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 59.5 versus 35.6 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do GLM-5.3 and Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5.3 has 42 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.1 Nemotron 51b Instruct has 12.

Related comparisons

Go deeper