How do GLM-5.3 and Qwen3.8 27B 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 and Qwen3.8 27B when publicly disclosed.

LLM Comparison

GLM-5.3 vs Qwen3.8 27B: benchmark scores, pricing & comparison.

Q: Which is better: GLM-5.3 or Qwen3.8 27B?

AskClash compares GLM-5.3 and Qwen3.8 27B 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 vs Qwen3.8 27B 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 model page Qwen3.8 27B model page

Rank #3 vs #18AskClash overall scores 80.4 vs 56.9.

Pricing $1.40/$4.40 vs $0.45/$3.20Input and output token prices per 1M tokens when published.

Open Weight vs Open WeightZ.AI vs Alibaba.

GLM-5.3 vs Qwen3.8 27B benchmark comparison

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

Metric	GLM-5.3	Qwen3.8 27B
Overall Score	80.4	56.9
Leaderboard Rank	#3	#18
ACB	62.2	56.4
RWT	8.5	—
HLE	62.5	30.8
GPQA	91.7	89.2
IFEval	—	79.5
SWE-Pro	—	61.7
Terminal-Bench	88.2	73.0
DeepSWE	66.9	42.2
OSWorld	—	84.3
CharXiv	—	90.2
Input Price (per 1M tokens)	$1.40	$0.45
Output Price (per 1M tokens)	$4.40	$3.20
Context Window	1M	262K
Benchmarks Published	7	9

GLM-5.3 vs Qwen3.8 27B head-to-head charts

GLM-5.3 leads 6 and Qwen3.8 27B leads 0 of 6 shared benchmarks. Qwen3.8 27B is cheaper on a defined 1M-input / 200K-output workload. Charts show only benchmarks both models publish.

GLM-5.3Qwen3.8 27B

Overall

80.4GLM-5.3

56.9Qwen3.8 27B

ACB

62.2GLM-5.3

56.4Qwen3.8 27B

HLE

62.5GLM-5.3

30.8Qwen3.8 27B

GPQA

91.7GLM-5.3

89.2Qwen3.8 27B

Terminal-Bench

88.2GLM-5.3

73.0Qwen3.8 27B

DeepSWE

66.9GLM-5.3

42.2Qwen3.8 27B

GLM-5.3

Input$1.40

Output$4.40

Workload$2.28

Context1M

Qwen3.8 27B

Input$0.45

Output$3.20

Workload$1.09

Context262K

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

More GLM-5.3 and Qwen3.8 27B comparisons

Explore how GLM-5.3 and Qwen3.8 27B stack up against other top-ranked LLMs.

Claude Opus 5 vs GLM-5.3 Claude Opus 5 vs Qwen3.8 27B Claude Fable 5 vs GLM-5.3 Claude Fable 5 vs Qwen3.8 27B GLM-5.3 vs Grok 4.6 Grok 4.6 vs Qwen3.8 27B GLM-5.3 vs GPT-5.6 Sol GPT-5.6 Sol vs Qwen3.8 27B GLM-5.3 vs Kimi K3 Kimi K3 vs Qwen3.8 27B

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.