Which is better: GLM-5.3-Flash or Kimi K3?

Verdict: GLM-5.3-Flash ranks higher (#19 vs #25) and wins 7 of 9 shared benchmarks; GLM-5.3-Flash costs less ($0.15/$0.50 vs $3.00/$15.0 per 1M tokens). AskClash compares GLM-5.3-Flash and Kimi K3 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.

How do GLM-5.3-Flash and Kimi K3 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 Kimi K3 when publicly disclosed.

LLM Comparison

GLM-5.3-Flash vs Kimi K3: benchmark scores, pricing & comparison.

Side-by-side GLM-5.3-Flash vs Kimi K3 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.

Verdict: GLM-5.3-Flash ranks higher (#19 vs #25) and wins 7 of 9 shared benchmarks; GLM-5.3-Flash costs less ($0.15/$0.50 vs $3.00/$15.0 per 1M tokens).

Open live leaderboard GLM-5.3-Flash model page Kimi K3 model page

Rank #19 vs #25AskClash overall scores 59.4 vs 55.6.

Pricing $0.15/$0.50 vs $3.00/$15.0Input and output token prices per 1M tokens when published.

Open Weight vs Open WeightZ.AI vs Moonshot AI.

GLM-5.3-Flash vs Kimi K3 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	Kimi K3
Overall Score	59.4	55.6
Leaderboard Rank	#19	#25
ACB	61.2	57.7
RWT	8.5	8.0
Coding Agent Index	—	51.9
HLE	55.3	43.5
GPQA	91.2	93.5
SWE-Atlas	—	66.1
Terminal-Bench	32.8	12.6
DeepSWE	63.4	68.5
GDPval-AA	1773.0	1668.0
MCP Atlas	—	84.2
Finance Agent	57.9	53.1
CharXiv	89.4	84.8
MMMU-Pro	—	81.6
ARC-AGI 2	—	60.4
Input Price (per 1M tokens)	$0.15	$3.00
Output Price (per 1M tokens)	$0.50	$15.0
Context Window	1M	1M
Benchmarks Published	11	16

GLM-5.3-Flash vs Kimi K3 head-to-head charts

GLM-5.3-Flash leads 8 and Kimi K3 leads 2 of 10 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-FlashKimi K3

Overall

59.4GLM-5.3-Flash

55.6Kimi K3

ACB

61.2GLM-5.3-Flash

57.7Kimi K3

RWT

8.5GLM-5.3-Flash

8.0Kimi K3

HLE

55.3GLM-5.3-Flash

43.5Kimi K3

GPQA

91.2GLM-5.3-Flash

93.5Kimi K3

Terminal-Bench

32.8GLM-5.3-Flash

12.6Kimi K3

DeepSWE

63.4GLM-5.3-Flash

68.5Kimi K3

GDPval-AA

1773.0GLM-5.3-Flash

1668.0Kimi K3

Finance Agent

57.9GLM-5.3-Flash

53.1Kimi K3

CharXiv

89.4GLM-5.3-Flash

84.8Kimi K3

GLM-5.3-Flash

Input$0.15

Output$0.50

Workload$0.25

Context1M

Kimi K3

Input$3.00

Output$15.0

Workload$6.00

Context1M

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

More GLM-5.3-Flash and Kimi K3 comparisons

Explore how GLM-5.3-Flash and Kimi K3 stack up against other top-ranked LLMs.

Claude Opus 5.5 vs GLM-5.3-Flash Claude Opus 5.5 vs Kimi K3 Claude Fable 5.1 vs GLM-5.3-Flash Claude Fable 5.1 vs Kimi K3 Claude Opus 5 vs GLM-5.3-Flash Claude Opus 5 vs Kimi K3 Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs GLM-5.3-Flash Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs Kimi K3 Claude Fable 5 vs GLM-5.3-Flash Claude Fable 5 vs Kimi K3

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.