Model comparison

GLM-5.3 vs Wizardlm 70b

GLM-5.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.8 to 33.0 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.

GLM-5.3 Z.ai (Zhipu)

54.8

Rank #26 Confirmed

Wizardlm 70b Microsoft

33.0

Rank #249 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-5.3 scores higher in 7 categories and Wizardlm 70b in 0 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where GLM-5.3 leads 75.7 to 34.8.

Side by side

GLM-5.3 and Wizardlm 70b specifications
GLM-5.3Wizardlm 70b
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)Microsoft
Noometry Index54.833.0
Released2026-08-14—
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), Wizardlm 70b: 31.4 (#285)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Wizardlm 70b
LMArena Coding14961081
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), Wizardlm 70b: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Wizardlm 70b
APEX-Agents56.6%—
Vending-Bench 28,164—

Reasoning GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 46.1 (#46), Wizardlm 70b: 20.7 (#234)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Wizardlm 70b
LMArena Hard Prompts14891079
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), Wizardlm 70b: 32.2 (#218)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Wizardlm 70b
LMArena Math14891116
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), Wizardlm 70b: —

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Wizardlm 70b
GPQA Diamond90.9%—
SimpleQA Verified41%—
LMArena Expert1516—

Multilingual GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 55.7 (#28), Wizardlm 70b: 29.6 (#265)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Wizardlm 70b
LMArena Non-English14571078
LMArena Chinese15281052
LMArena German14991083
LMArena Russian14631155
LMArena French1499—
LMArena Japanese1453—
LMArena Korean1472—
LMArena Spanish1460—

Instruction Following GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 77.5 (#23), Wizardlm 70b: 56.3 (#273)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Wizardlm 70b
LMArena Instruction Following14771093

Long Context GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 45.4 (#41), Wizardlm 70b: 33.3 (#263)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Wizardlm 70b
LMArena Longer Query14821097

Writing & Preference GLM-5.3 leads

GLM-5.3: 75.7 (#6), Wizardlm 70b: 34.8 (#269)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.3Wizardlm 70b
LMArena Text14711120
LMArena Creative Writing14571149
LMArena Multi-Turn14721108
EQ-Bench Creative Writing2075—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-5.3 better than Wizardlm 70b?

GLM-5.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.8 to 33.0 on the Noometry Index.

Is GLM-5.3 or Wizardlm 70b better for coding?

GLM-5.3 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 59.5 versus 31.4 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do GLM-5.3 and Wizardlm 70b share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5.3 has 42 scored results on Noometry and Wizardlm 70b has 12.

Related comparisons

Go deeper