Gemini 3.0 FlashvsGLM-5.3-Flash
Gemini 3.0 Flash | GLM-5.3-Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| Specifications | ||
ParametersA rough measure of how big the model is. More parameters usually means more capable and more expensive to run, though it is a poor guide on its own — a smaller, newer model often beats a larger, older one. | — | 320B |
Context windowHow much text the model can hold in mind at once — your question, any documents you attach, the conversation so far, and its own reply. Go past it and the earliest part falls out of view. | — | 1M |
| Benchmarks | ||
Terminal-Bench 2.1Agentic terminal coding — Can the AI work in a command-line terminal — running commands and finishing technical setup tasks the way a developer would? Higher is better. | 58% | 84.3% |
| BenchmarksPublished by one model only | ||
SWE-Bench ProAgentic coding — Can the AI fix real bugs in real software? It's handed actual problems from open-source projects and has to write code that genuinely solves them. Higher is better. | 49.6% | — |
SWE-Bench VerifiedCoding — Real coding tasks pulled from open-source projects — the AI has to find and fix actual bugs. A human-checked version of the original SWE-Bench. Higher is better. | 78% | — |
DeepSWE 1.1Agentic coding — Artificial Analysis' independent test of deep, agentic software-engineering work — the AI has to plan and carry out substantial coding tasks end to end. (Version 1.1 of the test.) Higher is better. | — | 63.4% |
MCP AtlasMulti-step tool use — Can the AI chain together many tools and steps to complete one bigger task, rather than doing just a single thing? Higher is better. | 62% | — |
ToolathlonGeneral tool use — Tests how well the AI uses everyday real-world tools and apps to get things done. Higher is better. | 49.4% | — |
Humanity's Last Exam · no toolsMultidisciplinary reasoning — Humanity's Last Exam — extremely hard expert questions across many subjects, written so you can't just look up the answer. “No tools” means the AI answers on its own. Higher is better. | 33.7% | — |
Humanity's Last Exam · with toolsMultidisciplinary reasoning — Humanity's Last Exam — extremely hard expert questions across many subjects. “With tools” means the AI is allowed to search the web or run code while answering. Higher is better. | — | 55.3% |
ARC-AGI-2Abstract reasoning — Puzzle-style tests of abstract reasoning and pattern-finding — the kind of thing people find easy but AIs often struggle with. Higher is better. | 33.6% | — |
GPQA DiamondScience — Graduate-level science questions in biology, physics, and chemistry — hard enough that subject-matter PhDs score around 65%. Higher is better. | 90.4% | — |
OSWorld-VerifiedAgentic computer use — Can the AI actually operate a computer — clicking, typing, and using real apps — to finish tasks on its own? Higher is better. | 65.1% | — |
Agent's Last Exam · pass@1Agentic computer use — A hard set of desktop and operating-system tasks an AI agent has to finish by looking at the screen and working the machine itself. The score is the share it passes outright — partial credit does not count. Higher is better. | — | 26.3% |
AutomationBenchBusiness workflows — Tests whether the AI can run real multi-step business workflows — the kind of end-to-end office processes companies want to automate — from start to finish. Higher is better. | — | 48.8% |
Finance Agent v2Agentic financial analysis — Tests the AI on real financial-analysis work, like digging through reports and making sound decisions. Higher is better. | 42.6% | — |
GDPval-AAKnowledge work — Measures how well the AI does economically valuable knowledge work, judged against human experts. Shown as a rating (like a chess Elo) — higher is better. | 1204 | — |
GDPval-AA v2Knowledge work — economically valuable knowledge work (v2, re-based Elo) | — | 1773 |
CharXiv ReasoningChart reasoning — Can the AI read and reason about complex charts and figures, not just text? Higher is better. | 80.3% | — |
MMMU-ProMultimodal reasoning — A tougher version of MMMU — college-level questions that mix images, diagrams, and text together. Higher is better. | 81.2% | — |
Blueprint-Bench 2Spatial reasoning — Can the AI reason about space and layout — for example, understanding a floor plan or blueprint? Higher is better. | 0% | — |
MRCR v2 (8-needle) · 128k averageLong context — Tests whether the AI can find specific details buried inside a very long document (around 128k tokens — roughly a long book). Higher is better. | 67.2% | — |
MRCR v2 (8-needle) · 1M pointwiseLong context — Tests whether the AI can find specific details buried inside an enormous document (around 1 million tokens — many books). Higher is better. | 22.1% | — |
| Overview | ||
| Company | Z.ai | |
| Release date | Dec 17 2025 | Aug 26 2026 |
| Access | Proprietary | Open Weight |
Other comparisons
Gemini 3.0 FlashvsClaude Opus 5GLM-5.3-FlashvsClaude Opus 5Gemini 3.0 FlashvsGPT-5.6 SolGLM-5.3-FlashvsGPT-5.6 SolGemini 3.0 FlashvsMuse GlimmerGLM-5.3-FlashvsMuse GlimmerGemini 3.0 FlashvsGrok 4.6GLM-5.3-FlashvsGrok 4.6Gemini 3.0 FlashvsDeepSeek-V4-Pro-0813GLM-5.3-FlashvsDeepSeek-V4-Pro-0813Gemini 3.0 FlashvsMistral Medium 3.5GLM-5.3-FlashvsMistral Medium 3.5
Frequently asked questions
GLM-5.3-Flash leads Gemini 3.0 Flash on 1 of the 1 benchmark they both report (Terminal-Bench 2.1). Gemini 3.0 Flash shipped 252 days before GLM-5.3-Flash, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
Gemini 3.0 Flash is proprietary, while GLM-5.3-Flash is open weight.
On Terminal-Bench 2.1, GLM-5.3-Flash leads at 84.3% vs Gemini 3.0 Flash at 58%.
Gemini 3.0 Flash was released by Google on Dec 17 2025.
GLM-5.3-Flash was released by Z.ai on Aug 26 2026.
GLM-5.3-Flash leads on Terminal-Bench 2.1 — Gemini 3.0 Flash 58% vs GLM-5.3-Flash 84.3%.
Gemini 3.0 Flash is a proprietary model released by Google. GLM-5.3-Flash is an open weight model released by Z.ai.