Skip to main content
BenchLM

Data as of September 28, 2026 · How the score is built

CurrentOpen WeightReasoning

Released Aug 14, 20261M contextZ.AI GLM-5.3 model card

GLM-5.3

Decision readingGLM-5.3 scores 65.4 out of 100 and ranks #27 of 201. This profile shows 25 source-displayable benchmark rows; its strongest eligible category is Agentic at #9. Published weights can be self-hosted, but infrastructure cost varies and is not a comparable API token rate.

Released Aug 14, 2026 — see all recent releases

Decision snapshot

Each value carries a field reference instead of floating alone. Markers compare this model with the current ranked and priced catalog; they are not absolute quality thresholds.

Capability

65.4/100

field median 50.3#27 of 201 ranked models

Public

#27of 201

Verified —

Price

Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies

input median $1No comparable first-party hosted token rate

Speed

91tok/s

field median 95 tok/sFirst token 24.68 s

Context

1Mtokens

field median 256,000Maximum output length is tracked separately

Strongest published evidence

Agentic ranks #9. Particularly useful for coding agents, browser research, and computer-use workflows.

Validate before choosing

25 published rows leave some tracked benchmark slots empty. No comparable first-party API token rate is published.

Source-linked · 25 displayable benchmark rows

Follow model changes

Category score record

Scores and ranks appear only where published evidence can be displayed. The table keeps the score, weight, cohort, and evidence state together.

Category scores, ranks, weighting, benchmark coverage, and evidence status
CategoryScore
AgenticRank #9 of 111Percentile 93rdWeight 22%9 benchmarksVerified
67.3
CodingRank #22 of 136Percentile 84thWeight 20%13 benchmarksVerified
56.7
ReasoningWeight 17%0 benchmarksNot measured
Not measured
MultimodalWeight 12%0 benchmarksNot measured
Not measured
KnowledgeRank #33 of 160Percentile 80thWeight 12%2 benchmarksVerified
61.9
MultilingualWeight 7%0 benchmarksNot measured
Not measured
Inst. FollowingWeight 5%0 benchmarksNot measured
Not measured
MathWeight 5%0 benchmarksNot measured
Not measured

25 of 486 tracked benchmark slots have displayable evidence · bars run 0–100

Coverage details

How much of this is verified

Coverage is split by category so a strong number never hides a thin evidence base. Verified means the row is tied to a published source; provisional rows remain visible but separate.

  1. Agentic9/9 verified
  2. Coding13/13 verified
  3. ReasoningNot measured
  4. MultimodalNot measured
  5. Knowledge2/2 verified
  6. MultilingualNot measured
  7. Inst. FollowingNot measured
  8. MathNot measured
Verified sourceProvisionalNot measured

Capability shape

Each axis shows percentile within that category’s eligible cohort. The comparison outline is the median of the six nearest public-score peers; a collapsed vertex means the category is not rank-eligible.

GLM-5.3 category percentile values

  • Agentic93rd percentile
  • Coding84th percentile
  • ReasoningNot eligible
  • MultimodalNot eligible
  • Knowledge80th percentile
  • MultilingualNot eligible
  • Instruction followingNot eligible
  • MathNot eligible

The dashed outline is median of 6 nearest peers.

Eligible category ranks

  1. Agentic#9/111
  2. Coding#22/136
  3. ReasoningNot ranked
  4. MultimodalNot ranked
  5. Knowledge#33/160
  6. MultilingualNot ranked
  7. Inst. FollowingNot ranked
  8. MathNot ranked
Top decileTop quartileMid-fieldNot eligible

Benchmark ledger

Coding opens by default. The marker compares each value with the best source-verified result in the catalog; provisional leaders do not set the reference. Expand the remaining categories for every published row.

Coding13 rows
Coding benchmark values, best verified comparison, weight, and source status
FrontierSWE v2Score30.2%Versus best verified row

Best verified: GPT-6 Astra · 65.5%

Gap35.3 behindWeight8% ref. weight
LiveCodeBench (Vals)LiveCodeBench, Vals AI runScore80.5%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Claude Fable 5.1 · 90.5%

Gap10 behindWeight8% ref. weight
VulcanBench v3Score78.3%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Grok 4.5 · 89.9%

Gap11.6 behindWeight3% ref. weight
DeepSWEScore66.9%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Muse Spark 1.3 · 75.4%

Gap8.5 behindWeightDisplay only
Terminal-Bench 2.1Score88.2%Versus best verified row

Best verified: SWE-2 · 92.8%

Gap4.6 behindWeightDisplay only
terminalBench3Score28.3%Versus best verified row

Best verified: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash · 30%

Gap1.7 behindWeightDisplay only
NL2RepoScore58%Versus best verified row

Best verified: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash · 65.4%

Gap7.4 behindWeightDisplay only
ProgramBenchProgramBench: Can Language Models Rebuild Programs From Scratch?Score19.0%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Claude Opus 5 · 93.0%

Gap74 behindWeightDisplay only
FrontierSWEScore78.1%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Kimi K3 · 81.2%

Gap3.1 behindWeightDisplay only
sweMarathonScore42.5%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Step 5 Preview · 72.7%

Gap30.2 behindWeightDisplay only
PostTrain BenchScore39.8%Versus best verified row

Best verified: GLM-5.3 · 39.8%

GapBest verifiedWeightDisplay only
OpenHarmony BenchOpenHarmony Bench v1.0Score60.8%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Qwen3.8 Max · 60.8%

GapBest verifiedWeightDisplay only
SWE-bench (Vals)SWE-bench, Vals AI runScore95.4%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Claude Opus 5 · 97.0%

Gap1.6 behindWeightDisplay only
Agentic9 rows
Agentic benchmark values, best verified comparison, weight, and source status
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals)Terminal-Bench 2.1, Vals AI runScore71.5%Versus best verified row

Best verified: GPT-6 Astra · 87.3%

Gap15.8 behindWeight3% ref. weight
Terminal-Bench 2.1Score88.2%Versus best verified row

Best verified: SWE-2 · 92.8%

Gap4.6 behindWeightDisplay only
AutomationBenchScore48.2%Versus best verified row

Best verified: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash · 54.8%

Gap6.6 behindWeightDisplay only
Toolathlon-VerifiedScore73.0%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Claude Opus 5 · 80.6%

Gap7.6 behindWeightDisplay only
Agents' Last ExamScore28.5%Versus best verified row

Best verified: GPT-6 Astra · 59.3%

Gap30.8 behindWeightDisplay only
HLE w/ toolsHumanity's Last Exam with toolsScore62.5%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Claude Opus 5.5 · 67.7%

Gap5.2 behindWeightDisplay only
terminalBench3Score28.3%Versus best verified row

Best verified: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash · 30%

Gap1.7 behindWeightDisplay only
CyberGymScore84.5%Versus best verified row

Best verified: MiMo-V2.6-Flash · 95.1%

Gap10.6 behindWeightDisplay only
ExploitGymScore15.0%Versus best verified row

Best verified: GPT-6 Astra · 42.4%

Gap27.4 behindWeightDisplay only
Knowledge2 rows
Knowledge benchmark values, best verified comparison, weight, and source status
MMLU-Pro (Vals)MMLU-Pro, Vals AI runScore86.8%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Claude Fable 5.1 · 92.4%

Gap5.6 behindWeight6% ref. weight
GPQA Diamond (Vals)GPQA Diamond, Vals AI runScore88.1%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Gemini 3.1 Pro · 95.5%

Gap7.4 behindWeight2% ref. weight
External signals1 row
External signals benchmark values, best verified comparison, weight, and source status
ExploitBenchExploitBench v8-benchScore54%Versus best verified row

Best verified: GPT-6 Astra · 100%

Gap45.6 behindWeightDisplay only

Lineage

The sequence follows explicit supersedes links. Each score is estimated for that model; a relative can inform a sparse estimate but never sets a floor, so a newer release can score below an earlier one. Scores and prices remain blank when the corresponding public row or first-party rate is unavailable.

  1. Mar 1, 2026

    GLM-5

    Score 54.4 · $1 / $3.2

  2. Apr 7, 2026

    GLM-5.1

    Score 57.1 · $1.4 / $4.4

  3. Jun 16, 2026

    GLM-5.2

    Score 62.6 · $1.4 / $4.4

  4. Aug 14, 2026 · you are here

    GLM-5.3

    Score 65.4 · Price not listed

Radar

GLM-5.3 release history

Full release history

Radar confirmed these at the source. Use GLM-5.3 in your work? Explore Radar to follow supported changes and choose your alerts.

Radar

Spec sheet

Each documented value carries its source. Missing fields stay visible as not sourced or not published, rather than disappearing from the page.

API model ID
zai-org/GLM-5.3Z.AI GLM-5.3 model card
Context window
1MZ.AI GLM-5.3 model card
Maximum output
Not sourced yet
Knowledge cutoff
Not sourced yet
Input modalities
Not sourced yet
Output modalities
Not sourced yet
Parameters
Not sourced yet
Availability
Z.AI now publishes the 753.33B-parameter FP8 checkpoint under the custom GLM-5.3 License. The model card documents local serving with SGLang, vLLM, TokenSpeed, Transformers, KTransformers, Unsloth, and Ascend-compatible inference frameworks.
Cloud regions
Not tracked yet
Lifecycle
Current
API capabilities
Tool calling, structured outputs, and batch support are not tracked yet
Prompt caching
Not documented in the pricing recordZ.AI GLM-5.3 model card
Self-host
Open weights available; hardware estimate not sourced
Rate limits
Not tracked yet

How to read this profile

The visual layer above carries the decisions. These notes preserve the model, ranking, coverage, and family context behind the numbers.

GLM-5.3 ranks #27 of 201 on the public leaderboard with a score of 65.44/100. It does not yet have enough sourced coverage for a verified position.

GLM-5.3 is a open weight model with a 1M context window. It uses an explicit reasoning mode, which can improve complex problem solving while adding latency and token use.

Z.AI now publishes the 753.33B-parameter FP8 checkpoint under the custom GLM-5.3 License. The model card documents local serving with SGLang, vLLM, TokenSpeed, Transformers, KTransformers, Unsloth, and Ascend-compatible inference frameworks.

GLM-5.3 sits in the GLM-5 family with GLM-5, GLM-5.2, GLM-5.1, GLM-5.3-Flash, GLM-5-Turbo, GLM-5V-Turbo, GLM-5 (Reasoning). Its explicit predecessor is GLM-5.2. 25 of 486 tracked benchmark slots currently have displayable evidence. Missing categories stay blank.

Its strongest eligible category is Agentic at #9, while its lowest eligible position is Knowledge at #33. particularly useful for coding agents, browser research, and computer-use workflows.

Last updated September 28, 2026. Runtime fields remain blank until a sourced snapshot exists.

Deployment options

Self-host and provider-specific paths stay separate from benchmark evidence so operating constraints are visible before a score becomes the whole decision.

Published weights are available, but BenchLM does not yet have a sourced parameter and VRAM profile for this exact model. Hardware cost estimates stay unavailable until that sizing record is complete.

Estimate VRAM from known parameters

Questions

How does GLM-5.3 perform overall in AI benchmarks?

GLM-5.3 ranks #27 out of 201 models on the public BenchAlign leaderboard, with a score of 65.44/100. Its evidence status is Estimated, and this profile shows 25 source-displayable benchmark rows. The label describes evidence depth, not a provider quality claim; inspect category rows before choosing a workload.

Is GLM-5.3 good for knowledge and understanding?

GLM-5.3 ranks #33 out of 160 eligible models for knowledge and understanding, with a public category score of 61.9/100. Higher-ranked alternatives are available for workloads where this category decides the choice. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.

Is GLM-5.3 good for coding and programming?

GLM-5.3 ranks #22 out of 136 eligible models for coding and programming, with a public category score of 56.7/100. Higher-ranked alternatives are available for workloads where this category decides the choice. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.

Is GLM-5.3 good for agentic tool use and computer tasks?

GLM-5.3 ranks #9 out of 111 eligible models for agentic tool use and computer tasks, with a public category score of 67.3/100. That places it in the current top ten for this category. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.

Is GLM-5.3 open source?

GLM-5.3 is an open-weight model from Z.AI. Its weights can be downloaded for local or hosted deployment, subject to the published license. Open weight does not automatically mean open source: training data and training code may remain private, and commercial restrictions can still apply.

Which sibling models are related to GLM-5.3?

GLM-5.3 belongs to the GLM-5 family. Related tracked variants include GLM-5, GLM-5.2, GLM-5.1, plus 4 more. A sibling link indicates shared lineage or a documented configuration relationship; it does not mean the variants have identical pricing, context limits, benchmark evidence, or deployment behavior. Compare before switching.

Does GLM-5.3 have full benchmark coverage on BenchLM?

No. GLM-5.3 currently has 48 source-displayable rows across 486 tracked benchmark slots. The profile exposes published, non-generated evidence and leaves missing categories blank until an exact evaluation is available. Coverage describes how much was measured; it is not a penalty added to an individual benchmark result.

What is the context window size of GLM-5.3?

GLM-5.3 has a documented context window of 1M. That figure is the maximum combined prompt and retained-conversation space reported for this exact model; it is not the maximum output length. The profile keeps output limits separate because providers often publish those limits independently.

Watch GLM-5.3 in the weekly brief

Get one weekly email when material rank, price, availability, or benchmark evidence changes are worth revisiting.

Read a sample issue

Join 2,000+ readers.

Compare GLM-5.3 with every tracked model511 comparisons