How do GLM-5.3-Flash and GLM-5.2 compare on coding benchmarks?

The comparison table shows SWE-bench, SWE-Pro, SWE-Atlas, Terminal-Bench, DeepSWE, and coding agent index scores for both GLM-5.3-Flash and GLM-5.2 when publicly disclosed.

LLM Comparison

GLM-5.3-Flash vs GLM-5.2: benchmark scores, pricing & comparison.

Q: Which is better: GLM-5.3-Flash or GLM-5.2?

AskClash compares GLM-5.3-Flash and GLM-5.2 side by side across SWE-bench, GPQA, HLE, Terminal-Bench, coding agent scores, token pricing, AskClash ACB, and context window so you can see which model wins on each benchmark.

Side-by-side GLM-5.3-Flash vs GLM-5.2 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 leaderboard GLM-5.3-Flash model page GLM-5.2 model page

Rank #7 vs #21AskClash overall scores 71.8 vs 49.6.

Pricing $0.15/$0.50 vs $1.40/$4.40Input and output token prices per 1M tokens when published.

Open Weight vs Open WeightZ.AI vs Z.AI.

GLM-5.3-Flash vs GLM-5.2 benchmark comparison

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

Metric	GLM-5.3-Flash	GLM-5.2
Overall Score	71.8	49.6
Leaderboard Rank	#7	#21
ACB	61.2	—
RWT	8.5	8.5
Coding Agent Index	—	74.4
HLE	55.3	54.7
GPQA	91.2	91.2
IFEval	—	73.3
SWE-Pro	—	62.1
SWE-Atlas	—	74.4
Terminal-Bench	84.3	82.7
DeepSWE	63.4	43.8
GDPval-AA	1773.0	—
MCP Atlas	—	76.8
Finance Agent	—	49.7
CharXiv	89.4	—
Tau2	—	99.1
Input Price (per 1M tokens)	$0.15	$1.40
Output Price (per 1M tokens)	$0.50	$4.40
Context Window	1M	1M
Benchmarks Published	8	12

GLM-5.3-Flash vs GLM-5.2 head-to-head charts

GLM-5.3-Flash leads 4 and GLM-5.2 leads 0 of 6 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-FlashGLM-5.2

Overall

71.8GLM-5.3-Flash

49.6GLM-5.2

RWT

8.5GLM-5.3-Flash

8.5GLM-5.2

HLE

55.3GLM-5.3-Flash

54.7GLM-5.2

GPQA

91.2GLM-5.3-Flash

91.2GLM-5.2

Terminal-Bench

84.3GLM-5.3-Flash

82.7GLM-5.2

DeepSWE

63.4GLM-5.3-Flash

43.8GLM-5.2

GLM-5.3-Flash

Input$0.15

Output$0.50

Workload$0.25

Context1M

GLM-5.2

Input$1.40

Output$4.40

Workload$2.28

Context1M

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

More GLM-5.3-Flash and GLM-5.2 comparisons

Explore how GLM-5.3-Flash and GLM-5.2 stack up against other top-ranked LLMs.

Claude Opus 5 vs GLM-5.3-Flash Claude Opus 5 vs GLM-5.2 Claude Fable 5 vs GLM-5.3-Flash Claude Fable 5 vs GLM-5.2 GLM-5.3 vs GLM-5.3-Flash GLM-5.3 vs GLM-5.2 Grok 4.6 vs GLM-5.3-Flash Grok 4.6 vs GLM-5.2 GPT-5.6 Sol vs GLM-5.3-Flash GPT-5.6 Sol vs GLM-5.2

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.