Head-to-head
GLM-5.3-Flash vs GLM-5
A 1.7-point composite gap — but the real story is the dimension mix. Same weights, unpacked: who leads where, and whether the premium is justified.
The short answer
The composites differ by 1.7 points, and their strengths do not overlap.
Stronger overall: GLM-5.3-Flash. If you only run one workload, read the dimension table instead.
Overlaid radar
Same weights, same scale; overlap means parity
- GLM-5.3-Flash93.7
- GLM-592.0
Dimension deltas
A on the left, B on the right; 100 max per row
GLM-5.3-Flash leads 6, GLM-5 leads 2.
Spec sheet
Hard specs in one table
| Item | GLM-5.3-Flash | GLM-5 |
|---|---|---|
| Composite | 93.7 | 92.0 |
| Tier | S | S |
| Visual perception & grounding | 95WIN | 93 |
| Document parsing & Chinese OCR | 96WIN | 95 |
| Chart & document reasoning | 93WIN | 92 |
| Video & long-horizon reasoning | 90WIN | 88 |
| GUI agents & tool use | 94WIN | 91 |
| Generation & editing | 86 | 89WIN |
| Chinese context & culture | 94 | 95WIN |
| Ecosystem, cost & availability | 98WIN | 92 |
| Output price | ¥3 / M | ¥10 / M |
| Context | 1M | 200K |
| Parameters | 320B total / 18B active (MoE) | Undisclosed (MoE, trained on Ascend) |
| Licence | Open weights (MIT) | Commercial + on-prem license |
| Native multimodal | Yes | Yes |
| Evidence grade | B | A |
How to choose
Choose GLM-5.3-Flash if…
- Domestic-chip and on-prem projects on a budget
- Document batches and receipt extraction
- Commercial integration that needs an MIT licence
- You cannot accept its limitation: Video 90 and generation 86: neither long-video QA nor creative generation is its scenario.
How to choose
Choose GLM-5 if…
- Government/enterprise on-prem and Xinchuang
- Chinese official documents and research reports
- Complex agent workflows
- You cannot accept its limitation: Video temporal reasoning trails the leaders by about half a generation.
Scenario check
Five scenarios, who holds up
| Scenario | GLM-5.3-Flash | GLM-5 | Better |
|---|---|---|---|
| Chinese receipt OCR | 95 | 95 | Tie |
| Chart data extraction | 92 | 91 | GLM-5.3-Flash |
| 30-min video QA | 88 | 86 | GLM-5.3-Flash |
| On-prem document pipeline | 94 | 90 | GLM-5.3-Flash |
| Chinese cultural context | 94 | 95 | GLM-5 |
Comparison FAQ
GLM-5.3-Flash vs GLM-5: which is stronger?
Composite: GLM-5.3-Flash 93.7, GLM-5 92.0. GLM-5.3-Flash leads on Visual perception & grounding, Document parsing & Chinese OCR, Chart & document reasoning, Video & long-horizon reasoning, GUI agents & tool use, Ecosystem, cost & availability; GLM-5 leads on Generation & editing, Chinese context & culture. The stronger overall is GLM-5.3-Flash.
How much more expensive is GLM-5.3-Flash than GLM-5?
GLM-5.3-Flash is ¥3/1M output tokens; GLM-5 is ¥10/1M. On output price, GLM-5 is pricier; real cost also depends on image tokens and input share.
Can GLM-5 replace GLM-5.3-Flash?
It depends on your primary workload. If it sits in GLM-5’s strengths (Government/enterprise on-prem and Xinchuang, Chinese official documents and research reports, Complex agent workflows), yes. If you need Domestic-chip and on-prem projects on a budget, switching will cost quality.
Personal ranking · Not an official score
Every ranking, score and comparison on this page is an independent personal ranking, not an official score, and represents no vendor, institution or regulator. Scores are a subjective mapping of public evidence under our own weights — change the weights and the order changes. Disagree, or spotted a factual error? Contact the site owner: jizhi2024@foxmail.com — we check each report and log corrections in the changelog.