Model comparison

GLM-5.3 vs Olmo 7b Instruct

GLM-5.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.8 to 30.3 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 10 shared benchmarks.

GLM-5.3 Z.ai (Zhipu)

54.8

Rank #26 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 10 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-5.3 scores higher in 6 categories and Olmo 7b Instruct in 0 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where GLM-5.3 leads 75.7 to 25.8.

Side by side

GLM-5.3 and Olmo 7b Instruct specifications
GLM-5.3Olmo 7b Instruct
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)
Noometry Index54.830.3
Released2026-08-14—
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window1M—
Max output131K—
Input $ / M tokens$1.40—
Output $ / M tokens$4.40—
Results tracked4210

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 7b Instruct: 29.6 (#303)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Olmo 7b Instruct
LMArena Coding14961016
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), Olmo 7b Instruct: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Olmo 7b Instruct
APEX-Agents56.6%—
Vending-Bench 28,164—

Reasoning GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 46.1 (#46), Olmo 7b Instruct: 18.8 (#274)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Olmo 7b Instruct
LMArena Hard Prompts1489993
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), Olmo 7b Instruct: 30.2 (#237)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Olmo 7b Instruct
LMArena Math14891018
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)68.8%—
FrontierMath Tier 429.3%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202591.1%—
ProofBench49%—

Knowledge Not comparable

GLM-5.3: 58.3 (#37), Olmo 7b Instruct: —

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Olmo 7b Instruct
GPQA Diamond90.9%—
SimpleQA Verified41%—
LMArena Expert1516—

Multilingual GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 55.7 (#28), Olmo 7b Instruct: 24.0 (#291)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Olmo 7b Instruct
LMArena Non-English1457977
LMArena Chinese15281014
LMArena Russian1463947
LMArena French1499—
LMArena German1499—
LMArena Japanese1453—
LMArena Korean1472—
LMArena Spanish1460—

Instruction Following GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 77.5 (#23), Olmo 7b Instruct: 49.0 (#301)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Olmo 7b Instruct
LMArena Instruction Following1477978

Long Context Not comparable

GLM-5.3: 45.4 (#41), Olmo 7b Instruct: —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Olmo 7b Instruct
LMArena Longer Query1482—

Writing & Preference GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 75.7 (#6), Olmo 7b Instruct: 25.8 (#303)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Olmo 7b Instruct
LMArena Text14711032
LMArena Creative Writing1457990
LMArena Multi-Turn14721007
EQ-Bench Creative Writing2075—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-5.3 better than Olmo 7b Instruct?

GLM-5.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.8 to 30.3 on the Noometry Index.

Is GLM-5.3 or Olmo 7b Instruct better for coding?

GLM-5.3 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 59.5 versus 29.6 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do GLM-5.3 and Olmo 7b Instruct share?

10 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5.3 has 42 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 7b Instruct has 10.

Related comparisons

Go deeper