Noometry

Model comparison

GLM-5.3 vs Qwen3 Max

GLM-5.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.8 to 43.7 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 29 shared benchmarks.

GLM-5.3 Z.ai (Zhipu)

54.8

Rank #26 Confirmed

Qwen3 Max Alibaba (Qwen)

43.7

Rank #87 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 29 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-5.3 scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen3 Max in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where GLM-5.3 leads 62.3 to 38.7.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3): 68.8% for GLM-5.3 and 18.9% for Qwen3 Max.
  • GLM-5.3 is cheaper at $1.40 / $4.40 per million input/output tokens, against $1.20 / $6 for Qwen3 Max.
  • GLM-5.3 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 262K.
  • GLM-5.3 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GLM-5.3Qwen3 Max
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index54.843.7
Released2026-08-142025-09-23
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window1M262K
Max output131K66K
Input $ / M tokens$1.40$1.20
Output $ / M tokens$4.40$6
Results tracked4233

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), Qwen3 Max: 43.0 (#93)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3Qwen3 Max
LMArena Coding14961456
ALE-Bench1,317370.45
DeepSWE69%—
FrontierCode40.1%—
CursorBench42.6%—
LMArena WebDev1622—
FrontierSWE30.2%—
SciCode59%—
WeirdML75.4%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GLM-5.3: 36.4 (#38), Qwen3 Max: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.3Qwen3 Max
Vending-Bench 28,16471.56
APEX-Agents56.6%—

Reasoning GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 46.1 (#46), Qwen3 Max: 22.6 (#190)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3Qwen3 Max
NYT Connections (extended)74.2%30.1%
Chess Puzzles21%4%
LMArena Hard Prompts14891448
Mystery Game Puzzles33%5%
DTBench87.7%82.1%
LMCA55.5%28.3%
Epoch Capabilities Index155.61142.38
Kagi LLM Benchmark—72.5%
CritPt19.1%—
Bench to the Future 30.15—

Math GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 62.3 (#33), Qwen3 Max: 38.7 (#131)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3Qwen3 Max
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)68.8%18.9%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202591.1%73.3%
LMArena Math14891446
FrontierMath Tier 429.3%—
ProofBench49%—
MATH Level 5—97.1%

Knowledge GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 58.3 (#37), Qwen3 Max: 48.1 (#78)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3Qwen3 Max
GPQA Diamond90.9%72.6%
SimpleQA Verified41%48.7%
LMArena Expert15161455

Multilingual GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 55.7 (#28), Qwen3 Max: 53.7 (#62)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3Qwen3 Max
LMArena Non-English14571429
LMArena Chinese15281478
LMArena French14991449
LMArena German14991463
LMArena Japanese14531397
LMArena Korean14721399
LMArena Russian14631428
LMArena Spanish14601462

Instruction Following GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 77.5 (#23), Qwen3 Max: 74.8 (#87)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3Qwen3 Max
LMArena Instruction Following14771419

Long Context GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 45.4 (#41), Qwen3 Max: 41.6 (#134)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3Qwen3 Max
LMArena Longer Query14821438
Fiction.LiveBench—66.7%
CL-bench—14.5%

Writing & Preference GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 75.7 (#6), Qwen3 Max: 62.4 (#76)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3Qwen3 Max
LMArena Text14711439
LMArena Creative Writing14571402
LMArena Multi-Turn14721446
EQ-Bench Creative Writing2075—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-5.3 better than Qwen3 Max?

GLM-5.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.8 to 43.7 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, GLM-5.3 or Qwen3 Max?

GLM-5.3 is cheaper. It lists at $1.40 per million input tokens and $4.40 per million output tokens; Qwen3 Max lists at $1.20 and $6.

Is GLM-5.3 or Qwen3 Max better for coding?

GLM-5.3 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 59.5 versus 43.0 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

GLM-5.3 does, with 1M tokens against 262K.

How many benchmarks do GLM-5.3 and Qwen3 Max share?

29 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5.3 has 42 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 Max has 33.

Related comparisons

Go deeper