Grok 4.20 Multi Agent vs GLM 5.3 Flash
At a Glance
| Compare |  GLM 5.3 FlashZ.ai | |
|---|---|---|
| Intelligence, Cost, and Efficiency | ||
| IntelligenceHigher is better · MM Intelligence v2.5 | #22 of 4663.4 score · 2/3 sources · provisional · missing LiveBench · full-core range 42.3–75.6 | #29 of 4654.6 score · 2/3 sources · provisional · missing ARC-AGI-2 · full-core range 36.4–69.8 |
| CostLower is better · Published-token output estimate | UnrankedNot in the 44-model eligible cohort | #2 of 44$0.0087 per LiveBench case |
| EfficiencyHigher is better · MM Efficiency v1.5 | UnrankedNot in the 38-model eligible cohort | #1 of 3877.3 score · 2/3 sources · provisional · missing ARC-AGI-2 · full-core range 68.2–84.9 |
| Pricing and Limits | ||
| Input priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | $1.25Xai ↗ · Sep 3, 2026 | $0.075Z.ai ↗ · Aug 29, 2026 |
| Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | $2.50Xai ↗ · Sep 3, 2026 | $0.25Z.ai ↗ · Aug 29, 2026 |
| Context windowMaximum documented tokens | 1,000K | 1,000K |
| Model facts checked | Aug 29, 2026View model evidence → | Sep 2, 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
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent | GLM-5.3-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text Arenatext-2026-09-13-d25aabda0010 · arena_rating · leader | 1,449.9499% of row best · rating · grok-4.20-multi-agent-beta-0309; 95% CI [1446.16660741, 1453.71198087]; votes 60777; rank 46 | 1,471.89100% of row best · rating · glm-5.3-flash; 95% CI [1465.37026588, 1478.41920488]; votes 10038; rank 24 |
| LMArena Vision Arenavision-2026-09-13-d25aabda0010 · arena_rating · leader | 1,259.5597% of row best · rating · grok-4.20-multi-agent-beta-0309; 95% CI [1253.19837141, 1265.89693020]; votes 22925; rank 46 | 1,298.71100% of row best · rating · glm-5.3-flash; 95% CI [1287.06707337, 1310.34654848]; votes 3110; rank 17 |
| Overall ResultCounted from the protocol-matched rows above | 0 benchmark winsNo overall winner | 2 benchmark winsNo 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
| Field | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent | GLM-5.3-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Developer | xAI | Z.ai |
| Family | Grok 4 20 | Glm 5 3 Flash |
| Model | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent | GLM-5.3-Flash |
| Version | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent | GLM-5.3-Flash |
| Lifecycle | preview | active |
| Released | Unknown | 2026-09-02 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Unknown | Unknown |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image, Video, Document |
| Output modalities | Text | Text |
| Context window | 1,000K | 1,000K |
| Total parameters | Unknown | 320B |
| Active parameters | Unknown | 18B |
| License | Unknown | MIT |
| Open weights | No | Yes |
| API available | Yes | Yes |
| Self-hostable | No | Yes |
| Provider access | Xai (Standard) | Deepinfra (Standard), Fireworks Ai (Standard), Together Ai (Standard), Z.ai (Standard) |
| Capabilities | generation, reasoning, research, tools | agents, chat, computer-use, reasoning, structured_outputs, tools, vision |
Grok 4.20 Multi Agent Capabilities
GLM 5.3 Flash Capabilities
Related Comparisons
All image comparisons →| A | Pair | B | Context |
|---|---|---|---|
 GPT-6 AstraOpenAI | vs | cross-developer peersimage, text | |
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | vs | cross-developer peersimage, text | |
 Gemini 3.1 ProGoogle DeepMind | vs | cross-developer peerstext | |
 DeepSeek-V4.1-FlashDeepSeek | vs | cross-developer peersimage, text | |
| vs | Grok 4.6xAI | family variantsimage, text | |
 Qwen3.8-MaxQwen | vs | cross-developer peersimage, text | |
 Kimi-K3Moonshot AI | vs | cross-developer peersimage, text | |
 MiniMax-M3MiniMax | vs | cross-developer peersimage, text | |
| vs | GLM-5.3Z.ai | cross-developer peerstext | |
 Hy4 previewTencent | vs | cross-developer peerstext | |
Seed 2.1 ProByteDance Seed | vs | cross-developer peersimage, text | |
 Mistral Large 3Mistral AI | vs | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Primary Evidence
Sources and Freshness
Questions
Grok 4.20 Multi Agent vs GLM 5.3 Flash FAQs
Is Grok 4.20 Multi Agent or GLM 5.3 Flash better for coding?+
This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Grok 4.20 Multi Agent and GLM 5.3 Flash, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.
Which is cheaper, Grok 4.20 Multi Agent or GLM 5.3 Flash?+
Grok 4.20 Multi Agent is $1.25 and GLM 5.3 Flash is $0.075 per million tokens, so GLM 5.3 Flash is cheaper on this metric. Grok 4.20 Multi Agent is $2.50 and GLM 5.3 Flash is $0.25 per million tokens, so GLM 5.3 Flash is cheaper on this metric.
Which has a larger context window, Grok 4.20 Multi Agent or GLM 5.3 Flash?+
Neither model has a larger sourced context window in this comparison. Grok 4.20 Multi Agent is 1,000K and GLM 5.3 Flash is 1,000K.
Which performs better in benchmarks, Grok 4.20 Multi Agent or GLM 5.3 Flash?+
There is no overall benchmark winner: An overall winner requires at least two decisive benchmarks from at least two original publishers.
Can Grok 4.20 Multi Agent or GLM 5.3 Flash be self-hosted?+
GLM 5.3 Flash is the only model in this pair currently marked as self-hostable. Grok 4.20 Multi Agent is not marked open weight; GLM 5.3 Flash is open weight.
Can Grok 4.20 Multi Agent and GLM 5.3 Flash understand images?+
Grok 4.20 Multi Agent is documented with image input; GLM 5.3 Flash is documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.
Which can generate longer answers, Grok 4.20 Multi Agent or GLM 5.3 Flash?+
Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. Grok 4.20 Multi Agent is — and GLM 5.3 Flash is 131K.
Do Grok 4.20 Multi Agent and GLM 5.3 Flash support reasoning and tool use?+
Grok 4.20 Multi Agent: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. GLM 5.3 Flash: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Feature support does not establish relative quality.
Which is available from more inference providers, Grok 4.20 Multi Agent or GLM 5.3 Flash?+
Grok 4.20 Multi Agent has 1 sourced provider route; GLM 5.3 Flash has 4, so GLM 5.3 Flash has broader tracked availability.
Which offers better value, Grok 4.20 Multi Agent or GLM 5.3 Flash?+
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.