LLM Comparison

GLM-5.3-Flash vs Claude Opus 4.8: benchmark scores, pricing & comparison.

Side-by-side GLM-5.3-Flash vs Claude Opus 4.8 comparison across SWE-bench, GPQA, HLE, Terminal-Bench, coding agent scores, token pricing, context window, and AskClash RWT. Green marks the winner on each benchmark.

Open live leaderboardGLM-5.3-Flash model pageClaude Opus 4.8 model page
Rank #7 vs #9AskClash overall scores 71.8 vs 70.7.
Pricing $0.15/$0.50 vs $5.00/$25.0Input and output token prices per 1M tokens when published.
Open Weight vs ProprietaryZ.AI vs Anthropic.

GLM-5.3-Flash vs Claude Opus 4.8 benchmark comparison

Green cells highlight the winning model for each metric. Scores are cached from the AskClash LLM leaderboard snapshot.

MetricGLM-5.3-FlashClaude Opus 4.8
Overall Score71.870.7
Leaderboard Rank#7#9
ACB61.260.1
RWT8.59.0
Coding Agent Index—72.5
HLE55.357.9
GPQA91.293.6
IFEval—62.2
SWE-bench—88.6
SWE-Pro—69.2
SWE-Atlas—82.5
Terminal-Bench84.374.6
DeepSWE63.459.0
GDPval-AA1773.01889.8
OSWorld—83.4
MCP Atlas—82.2
Finance Agent—53.9
CharXiv89.489.9
ARC-AGI 2—72.1
Tau2—94.4
Input Price (per 1M tokens)$0.15$5.00
Output Price (per 1M tokens)$0.50$25.0
Context Window1M1M
Benchmarks Published818

GLM-5.3-Flash vs Claude Opus 4.8 head-to-head charts

GLM-5.3-Flash leads 4 and Claude Opus 4.8 leads 5 of 9 shared benchmarks. GLM-5.3-Flash is cheaper on a defined 1M-input / 200K-output workload. Charts show only benchmarks both models publish.

GLM-5.3-FlashClaude Opus 4.8
Overall
71.8GLM-5.3-Flash
70.7Claude Opus 4.8
ACB
61.2GLM-5.3-Flash
60.1Claude Opus 4.8
RWT
8.5GLM-5.3-Flash
9.0Claude Opus 4.8
HLE
55.3GLM-5.3-Flash
57.9Claude Opus 4.8
GPQA
91.2GLM-5.3-Flash
93.6Claude Opus 4.8
Terminal-Bench
84.3GLM-5.3-Flash
74.6Claude Opus 4.8
DeepSWE
63.4GLM-5.3-Flash
59.0Claude Opus 4.8
GDPval-AA
1773.0GLM-5.3-Flash
1889.8Claude Opus 4.8
CharXiv
89.4GLM-5.3-Flash
89.9Claude Opus 4.8
GLM-5.3-Flash
Input$0.15
Output$0.50
Workload$0.25
Context1M
Claude Opus 4.8
Input$5.00
Output$25.0
Workload$10
Context1M

Workload = published cost of 1M input + 200K output tokens. Open the live leaderboard for interactive compare charts.

More GLM-5.3-Flash and Claude Opus 4.8 comparisons

Explore how GLM-5.3-Flash and Claude Opus 4.8 stack up against other top-ranked LLMs.

Claude Opus 5 vs GLM-5.3-FlashClaude Opus 5 vs Claude Opus 4.8Claude Fable 5 vs GLM-5.3-FlashClaude Fable 5 vs Claude Opus 4.8GLM-5.3 vs GLM-5.3-FlashGLM-5.3 vs Claude Opus 4.8Grok 4.6 vs GLM-5.3-FlashGrok 4.6 vs Claude Opus 4.8GPT-5.6 Sol vs GLM-5.3-FlashGPT-5.6 Sol vs Claude Opus 4.8

How to read this comparison

Benchmark scores

Higher is better for all benchmark scores (SWE-bench, GPQA, HLE, Terminal-Bench, etc.). Green marks the model with the higher score.

Token pricing

Lower is better for input and output prices. Green marks the cheaper model per 1M tokens.

Coverage matters

Models with fewer disclosed benchmark cells may have inflated percentile scores. Check the benchmark cell count for context.

This comparison page is generated from the AskClash LLM leaderboard cache. Open the live leaderboard for real-time scores and interactive filtering.