Noometry

Model comparison

GLM-5.3 vs Solar Pro4

GLM-5.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.8 to 42.1 on the Noometry Index. Solar Pro4 costs 4.1× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-5.3's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 18 shared benchmarks.

GLM-5.3 Z.ai (Zhipu)

54.8

Rank #26 Confirmed

Solar Pro4 Upstage

42.1

Rank #121 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-5.3 scores higher in 8 categories and Solar Pro4 in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where GLM-5.3 leads 62.3 to 38.8.
  • Solar Pro4 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 524K.
  • GLM-5.3 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GLM-5.3Solar Pro4
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)Upstage
Noometry Index54.842.1
Released2026-08-142026-08-06
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window1M524K
Max output131K131K
Input $ / M tokens$1.40$0.30
Output $ / M tokens$4.40$1.20
Results tracked4218

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), Solar Pro4: 40.1 (#149)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3Solar Pro4
LMArena WebDev16221371
LMArena Coding14961437
DeepSWE69%—
FrontierCode40.1%—
CursorBench42.6%—
FrontierSWE30.2%—
SciCode59%—
WeirdML75.4%—
ALE-Bench1,317—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GLM-5.3: 36.4 (#38), Solar Pro4: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.3Solar Pro4
APEX-Agents56.6%—
Vending-Bench 28,164—

Reasoning GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 46.1 (#46), Solar Pro4: 28.5 (#104)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3Solar Pro4
LMArena Hard Prompts14891399
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), Solar Pro4: 38.8 (#128)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3Solar Pro4
LMArena Math14891416
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), Solar Pro4: 39.8 (#129)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3Solar Pro4
LMArena Expert15161427
GPQA Diamond90.9%—
SimpleQA Verified41%—

Multilingual GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 55.7 (#28), Solar Pro4: 48.7 (#139)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3Solar Pro4
LMArena Non-English14571361
LMArena Chinese15281415
LMArena French14991397
LMArena German14991364
LMArena Japanese14531309
LMArena Korean14721382
LMArena Russian14631360
LMArena Spanish14601401

Instruction Following GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 77.5 (#23), Solar Pro4: 72.7 (#132)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3Solar Pro4
LMArena Instruction Following14771377

Long Context GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 45.4 (#41), Solar Pro4: 42.1 (#130)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3Solar Pro4
LMArena Longer Query14821381

Writing & Preference GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 75.7 (#6), Solar Pro4: 56.5 (#138)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3Solar Pro4
LMArena Text14711386
LMArena Creative Writing14571316
LMArena Multi-Turn14721385
EQ-Bench Creative Writing2075—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-5.3 better than Solar Pro4?

GLM-5.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.8 to 42.1 on the Noometry Index. Solar Pro4 costs 4.1× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-5.3's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, GLM-5.3 or Solar Pro4?

Solar Pro4 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.

Is GLM-5.3 or Solar Pro4 better for coding?

GLM-5.3 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 59.5 versus 40.1 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

GLM-5.3 does, with 1M tokens against 524K.

How many benchmarks do GLM-5.3 and Solar Pro4 share?

18 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5.3 has 42 scored results on Noometry and Solar Pro4 has 18.

Related comparisons

Go deeper