Model comparison

GLM-5.3 vs OLMo 2 Furious 13B

GLM-5.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.8 to 29.7 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.

GLM-5.3 Z.ai (Zhipu)

54.8

Rank #26 Confirmed

Summary

  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where GLM-5.3 leads 58.3 to 18.3.

Side by side

GLM-5.3 and OLMo 2 Furious 13B specifications
GLM-5.3OLMo 2 Furious 13B
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)
Noometry Index54.829.7
Released2026-08-142024-12-31
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), OLMo 2 Furious 13B: 28.6 (#313)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3OLMo 2 Furious 13B
DeepSWE69%—
FrontierCode40.1%—
CursorBench42.6%—
LMArena WebDev1622—
FrontierSWE30.2%—
SciCode59%—
WeirdML75.4%—
LiveBench Coding—10.4%
LMArena Coding1496—
ALE-Bench1,317—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GLM-5.3: 36.4 (#38), OLMo 2 Furious 13B: —

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

Reasoning GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 46.1 (#46), OLMo 2 Furious 13B: 15.5 (#314)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3OLMo 2 Furious 13B
NYT Connections (extended)74.2%—
CritPt19.1%—
Chess Puzzles21%—
LiveBench Reasoning—16.3%
LMArena Hard Prompts1489—
Mystery Game Puzzles33%—
DTBench87.7%—
LiveBench Data Analysis—20.6%
LMCA55.5%—
Bench to the Future 30.15—
Epoch Capabilities Index155.61—
LiveBench—22.1%

Math GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 62.3 (#33), OLMo 2 Furious 13B: 23.1 (#273)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3OLMo 2 Furious 13B
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)68.8%—
FrontierMath Tier 429.3%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202591.1%—
ProofBench49%—
Omni-MATH—15.6%
LiveBench Math—13.6%
LMArena Math1489—

Knowledge GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 58.3 (#37), OLMo 2 Furious 13B: 18.3 (#283)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3OLMo 2 Furious 13B
GPQA Diamond90.9%—
SimpleQA Verified41%—
MMLU-Pro—31%
GPQA (HELM)—31.6%
LMArena Expert1516—

Multilingual Not comparable

GLM-5.3: 55.7 (#28), OLMo 2 Furious 13B: —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3OLMo 2 Furious 13B
LMArena Non-English1457—
LMArena Chinese1528—
LMArena French1499—
LMArena German1499—
LMArena Japanese1453—
LMArena Korean1472—
LMArena Russian1463—
LMArena Spanish1460—

Instruction Following GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 77.5 (#23), OLMo 2 Furious 13B: 60.9 (#248)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3OLMo 2 Furious 13B
LiveBench Instruction Following—60.6%
IFEval—73%
LMArena Instruction Following1477—

Long Context Not comparable

GLM-5.3: 45.4 (#41), OLMo 2 Furious 13B: —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3OLMo 2 Furious 13B
LMArena Longer Query1482—

Writing & Preference GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 75.7 (#6), OLMo 2 Furious 13B: 42.9 (#230)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3OLMo 2 Furious 13B
LMArena Text1471—
LMArena Creative Writing1457—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing2075—
WildBench—68.9%
LMArena Multi-Turn1472—
LiveBench Language—11.2%

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-5.3 better than OLMo 2 Furious 13B?

GLM-5.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.8 to 29.7 on the Noometry Index.

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

GLM-5.3 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 59.5 versus 28.6 in the Noometry coding category.

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

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5.3 has 42 scored results on Noometry and OLMo 2 Furious 13B has 12.

Related comparisons

Go deeper