Model comparison

GLM-5.3 vs Muse Glimmer 30B

GLM-5.3 has enough public results to be ranked (#26); Muse Glimmer 30B does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.

GLM-5.3 Z.ai (Zhipu)

54.8

Rank #26 Confirmed

Muse Glimmer 30B Meta

55.5

Unranked Sparse

Summary

  • They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. GLM-5.3 scores higher in 1 category and Muse Glimmer 30B in 0 categories; one gap is clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where GLM-5.3 leads 75.7 to 69.9.
  • Muse Glimmer 30B is cheaper at $0.30 / $1.20 per million input/output tokens, against $1.40 / $4.40 for GLM-5.3.
  • GLM-5.3 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 131K.

Side by side

GLM-5.3 and Muse Glimmer 30B specifications
GLM-5.3Muse Glimmer 30B
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)Meta
Noometry Index54.855.5
Released2026-08-14—
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window1M131K
Max output131K16K
Input $ / M tokens$1.40$0.30
Output $ / M tokens$4.40$1.20
Results tracked421

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

GLM-5.3: 59.5 (#14), Muse Glimmer 30B: —

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Muse Glimmer 30B
DeepSWE69%—
FrontierCode40.1%—
CursorBench42.6%—
LMArena WebDev1622—
FrontierSWE30.2%—
SciCode59%—
WeirdML75.4%—
LMArena Coding1496—
ALE-Bench1,317—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GLM-5.3: 36.4 (#38), Muse Glimmer 30B: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Muse Glimmer 30B
APEX-Agents56.6%—
Vending-Bench 28,164—

Reasoning Not comparable

GLM-5.3: 46.1 (#46), Muse Glimmer 30B: —

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Muse Glimmer 30B
NYT Connections (extended)74.2%—
CritPt19.1%—
Chess Puzzles21%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1489—
Mystery Game Puzzles33%—
DTBench87.7%—
LMCA55.5%—
Bench to the Future 30.15—
Epoch Capabilities Index155.61—

Math Not comparable

GLM-5.3: 62.3 (#33), Muse Glimmer 30B: —

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Muse Glimmer 30B
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)68.8%—
FrontierMath Tier 429.3%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202591.1%—
ProofBench49%—
LMArena Math1489—

Knowledge Not comparable

GLM-5.3: 58.3 (#37), Muse Glimmer 30B: —

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Muse Glimmer 30B
GPQA Diamond90.9%—
SimpleQA Verified41%—
LMArena Expert1516—

Multilingual Not comparable

GLM-5.3: 55.7 (#28), Muse Glimmer 30B: —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Muse Glimmer 30B
LMArena Non-English1457—
LMArena Chinese1528—
LMArena French1499—
LMArena German1499—
LMArena Japanese1453—
LMArena Korean1472—
LMArena Russian1463—
LMArena Spanish1460—

Instruction Following Not comparable

GLM-5.3: 77.5 (#23), Muse Glimmer 30B: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Muse Glimmer 30B
LMArena Instruction Following1477—

Long Context Not comparable

GLM-5.3: 45.4 (#41), Muse Glimmer 30B: —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Muse Glimmer 30B
LMArena Longer Query1482—

Writing & Preference GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 75.7 (#6), Muse Glimmer 30B: 69.9

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Muse Glimmer 30B
EQ-Bench Creative Writing20751798
LMArena Text1471—
LMArena Creative Writing1457—
LMArena Multi-Turn1472—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-5.3 better than Muse Glimmer 30B?

GLM-5.3 has enough public results to be ranked (#26); Muse Glimmer 30B does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Which is cheaper, GLM-5.3 or Muse Glimmer 30B?

Muse Glimmer 30B is cheaper. It lists at $0.30 per million input tokens and $1.20 per million output tokens; GLM-5.3 lists at $1.40 and $4.40.

Which has the bigger context window?

GLM-5.3 does, with 1M tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks do GLM-5.3 and Muse Glimmer 30B share?

1 benchmark has published results for both models. GLM-5.3 has 42 scored results on Noometry and Muse Glimmer 30B has 1.

Related comparisons

Go deeper