Gemini 3.5 Flash vs GLM 5.3

At a Glance

Compare
Gemini 3.5 FlashGoogle DeepMind
Intelligence, Cost, and Efficiency
IntelligenceHigher is better · MM Intelligence v2.5#15 of 4672.1 score · 3/3 sources · complete#16 of 4670.4 score · 2/3 sources · provisional · missing ARC-AGI-2 · full-core range 46.9–80.3
CostLower is better · Published-token output estimate#25 of 44$0.140 per LiveBench case#34 of 44$0.248 per LiveBench case
EfficiencyHigher is better · MM Efficiency v1.5#15 of 3856.8 score · 3/3 sources · complete#26 of 3850.0 score · 2/3 sources · provisional · missing ARC-AGI-2 · full-core range 38.2–54.9
Pricing and Limits
Input priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens$1.50Google AI · Aug 29, 2026$1.20Deepinfra · Sep 22, 2026
Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens$9.00Google AI · Aug 29, 2026$4.00Deepinfra · Sep 22, 2026
Context windowMaximum documented tokens1,049K1,000K
Model facts checkedAug 29, 2026View model evidence →Aug 29, 2026View model evidence →

Token prices are the lowest available sourced USD rates; input and output may use different providers. Cost ranking estimates output spend on LiveBench, not a full request bill. Ranking methodology →

Available Benchmarks

All benchmark results →
BenchmarkGemini 3.5 FlashGLM-5.3
LMArena Text Arenatext-2026-09-13-d25aabda0010 · arena_rating · statistical tie1,475.72100% of row best · rating · gemini-3.5-flash-medium; 95% CI [1471.24691172, 1480.19960285]; votes 36627; rank 191,475.08100% of row best · rating · glm-5.3-max; 95% CI [1468.67816284, 1481.48915679]; votes 10960; rank 20
LiveBench2026-06-25 · overall · leader78.84100% of row best · percent · gemini-3.5-flash-high · 15,522 output tokens / case79.15100% of row best · percent · glm-5.3 · 62,090 output tokens / case
ToneBench2026-09-11-10-task-4ef099199c9c · overall_score · unverified75.5886% of row best · points · Gemini 3.5 Flash (high thinking) · 16,743 output tokens / case88.34100% of row best · points · GLM-5.3 · 22,204 output tokens / case
Overall ResultCounted from the protocol-matched rows above · 1 tie0 benchmark winsNo overall winner1 benchmark winNo overall winner

Third-party benchmark Only like-for-like primary-publisher results are shown; raw scores, relative scores, configuration, and token spend remain visible.

Side-by-Side Facts

FieldGemini 3.5 FlashGLM-5.3
DeveloperGoogle DeepMindZ.ai
FamilyGemini 3Glm 5 3
ModelGemini 3.5 FlashGLM-5.3
VersionGemini 3.5 FlashGLM-5.3
Lifecycleactiveactive
ReleasedUnknownUnknown
Knowledge cutoffUnknownUnknown
Input modalitiesText, Image, Video, Audio, DocumentText
Output modalitiesTextText
Context window1,049K1,000K
Total parametersUnknownUnknown
Active parametersUnknownUnknown
LicenseUnknownUnknown
Open weightsNoNo
API availableYesYes
Self-hostableNoNo
Provider accessGoogle AI (Standard), Google Gemini (Standard)Deepinfra (Standard), Fireworks Ai (Standard), Together Ai (Standard), Z.ai (Standard)
Capabilitieschat, generation, reasoning, toolsagents, chat, reasoning, structured_outputs, tools

Gemini 3.5 Flash Capabilities

chatgenerationreasoningtools
Serving providers2
Canonical IDgoogle-deepmind/gemini-3.5-flash

GLM 5.3 Capabilities

agentschatreasoningstructured outputstools
Serving providers4
Canonical IDzai-org/glm-5.3

Primary Evidence

Sources and Freshness

Questions

Gemini 3.5 Flash vs GLM 5.3 FAQs

Is Gemini 3.5 Flash or GLM 5.3 better for coding?+

This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Gemini 3.5 Flash and GLM 5.3, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.

Which is cheaper, Gemini 3.5 Flash or GLM 5.3?+

Gemini 3.5 Flash is $1.50 and GLM 5.3 is $1.20 per million tokens, so GLM 5.3 is cheaper on this metric. Gemini 3.5 Flash is $9.00 and GLM 5.3 is $4.00 per million tokens, so GLM 5.3 is cheaper on this metric.

Which has a larger context window, Gemini 3.5 Flash or GLM 5.3?+

Gemini 3.5 Flash has the larger sourced context window. Gemini 3.5 Flash supports 1,049K and GLM 5.3 supports 1,000K.

Which performs better in benchmarks, Gemini 3.5 Flash or GLM 5.3?+

There is no overall benchmark winner: An overall winner requires at least two decisive benchmarks from at least two original publishers.

Can Gemini 3.5 Flash or GLM 5.3 be self-hosted?+

Both models have the same recorded self-hosting status: unsupported. Gemini 3.5 Flash is not marked open weight; GLM 5.3 is not marked open weight.

Can Gemini 3.5 Flash and GLM 5.3 understand images?+

Gemini 3.5 Flash is documented with image input; GLM 5.3 is not documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.

Which can generate longer answers, Gemini 3.5 Flash or GLM 5.3?+

GLM 5.3 has the larger sourced maximum output: Gemini 3.5 Flash supports 66K and GLM 5.3 supports 131K output tokens.

Do Gemini 3.5 Flash and GLM 5.3 support reasoning and tool use?+

Gemini 3.5 Flash: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. GLM 5.3: reasoning and tool calling. Feature support does not establish relative quality.

Which is available from more inference providers, Gemini 3.5 Flash or GLM 5.3?+

Gemini 3.5 Flash has 2 sourced provider routes; GLM 5.3 has 4, so GLM 5.3 has broader tracked availability.

Which offers better value, Gemini 3.5 Flash or GLM 5.3?+

There is no universal value winner. Compare the input and output prices above with the matched benchmark result for your workload: cheaper tokens can be offset by different quality, token usage, latency, or provider availability.

Send Feedback