Gemini 3.6 FlashvsGLM-5.3
Gemini 3.6 Flash | GLM-5.3 | |
|---|---|---|
| Specifications | ||
Parameters | — | 743B |
| Benchmarks | ||
Nonsense detection BullshitBench v2Given a confidently-worded but nonsensical prompt, does the AI spot that it makes no sense and push back — instead of playing along and inventing an answer? The score is how often it clearly called out the nonsense. Higher is better. | 39% | — |
Prompt injection robustness Gray Swan IPI · k = 1Attackers hide malicious instructions inside content the AI reads — a web page, an email, a document — and try to hijack what it does. Gray Swan's indirect prompt injection benchmark measures how often such an attack succeeds when the attacker gets a single try. Lower is better. | 7.3% | — |
Prompt injection robustness Gray Swan IPI · k = 10Attackers hide malicious instructions inside content the AI reads — a web page, an email, a document — and try to hijack what it does. This variant gives the attacker 10 tries and counts an attack as successful if any of them works. Lower is better. | 32.2% | — |
Prompt injection robustness Gray Swan IPI · k = 15Attackers hide malicious instructions inside content the AI reads — a web page, an email, a document — and try to hijack what it does. This variant gives the attacker 15 tries and counts an attack as successful if any of them works. Lower is better. | 37.3% | — |
Agentic coding CursorBench v3.2Cursor's own test of harder, real-world coding tasks inside a code editor, on the refreshed v3.2 task set. Scores aren't comparable with v3.1. Higher is better. | 53.5% | — |
Agentic coding DeepSWE 1.1Artificial 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. | 49% | 66.9%Best |
ML engineering MLE-BenchCan the AI do the work of a machine-learning engineer? It competes in real Kaggle competitions — building, training, and tuning models end to end — and the score reflects how well it places. Higher is better. | 63.9% | — |
Agentic terminal coding Terminal-Bench 3.0command-line task completion (v3.0, much harder task set) | — | 28.3% |
Browser agent BU BenchCan the AI drive a real web browser to finish tasks — clicking, filling forms, and navigating sites the way a person would? Run by Browser Use on their BU Bench task set. Higher is better. | 68% | — |
Cybersecurity CyberGymTests the AI on cybersecurity challenges — finding and exploiting software weaknesses inside a safe sandbox. Higher is better. | — | 84.5% |
Cybersecurity ExploitBenchA 'capability ladder' for security research, built by CMU researchers: the AI is given known bugs in Chrome's V8 engine and scored on how far it gets toward a working exploit inside a research sandbox — from understanding the patch to triggering a crash. Higher is better. | — | 54.4% |
Cybersecurity ExploitGym · 6-hour budgetCan an AI agent turn a known software vulnerability into a working attack in a controlled lab? Built by MPI-SP researchers, the score is how many of 898 real cases (userspace programs, the V8 engine, the Linux kernel) it cracks — here with a 6-hour compute budget per case. Higher is better. | — | 130 |
Cybersecurity ExploitGym · 2-hour budgetCan an AI agent turn a known software vulnerability into a working attack in a controlled lab? Built by MPI-SP researchers, the score is how many of 898 real cases (userspace programs, the V8 engine, the Linux kernel) it cracks — here with a 2-hour compute budget per case. Higher is better. | — | 105 |
Multidisciplinary reasoning Humanity's Last Exam · with toolsHumanity'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. | — | 62.5% |
Agentic computer use OSWorld-VerifiedCan the AI actually operate a computer — clicking, typing, and using real apps — to finish tasks on its own? Higher is better. | 83% | — |
Agentic computer use Agent's Last ExamA 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. | — | 28.5% |
Business workflows AutomationBenchTests 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. | — | 48.2% |
Knowledge work GDPval-AA v2economically valuable knowledge work (v2, re-based Elo) | 1421 | 1769Best |
Community preference Arena Elo (Text)Real people chat with two anonymous AIs side by side and vote for the answer they prefer. Votes become a chess-style Elo rating on arena.ai — it measures which AI people actually like, not test scores. Higher is better. | 1482 | — |
Community preference (code) Arena Elo (Code)Like the text arena, but people vote on which AI writes better code. The votes become a chess-style Elo rating on arena.ai. Higher is better. | 1533 | — |
| Overview | ||
| Company | Z.ai | |
| Release date | Jul 21 2026 | Aug 14 2026 |
| Access | Proprietary | Proprietary |
Which is better: Gemini 3.6 Flash or GLM-5.3?
GLM-5.3 leads Gemini 3.6 Flash on 2 of the 2 benchmarks they both report (DeepSWE 1.1, GDPval-AA v2). Gemini 3.6 Flash shipped 24 days before GLM-5.3, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
Published specifications for these two models are limited — see each model page for the latest details.
On DeepSWE 1.1, GLM-5.3 leads at 66.9% vs Gemini 3.6 Flash at 49%. On GDPval-AA v2, GLM-5.3 leads at 1769 vs Gemini 3.6 Flash at 1421.
Frequently asked questions
Gemini 3.6 Flash was released by Google on Jul 21 2026.
GLM-5.3 was released by Z.ai on Aug 14 2026.
GLM-5.3 leads on DeepSWE 1.1 — Gemini 3.6 Flash 49% vs GLM-5.3 66.9%.
Other comparisons
Gemini 3.6 FlashvsClaude Opus 5GLM-5.3vsClaude Opus 5Gemini 3.6 FlashvsGPT-5.6-CyberGLM-5.3vsGPT-5.6-CyberGemini 3.6 FlashvsMuse GlimmerGLM-5.3vsMuse GlimmerGemini 3.6 FlashvsGrok 4.6GLM-5.3vsGrok 4.6Gemini 3.6 FlashvsDeepSeek-V4-Pro-0813GLM-5.3vsDeepSeek-V4-Pro-0813Gemini 3.6 FlashvsMistral Medium 3.5GLM-5.3vsMistral Medium 3.5