Llama 3.1 8B Instruct vs GLM 5.3 Flash

At a Glance

Compare
Intelligence, Cost, and Efficiency
IntelligenceHigher is better · MM Intelligence v2.5UnrankedNot in the 46-model eligible cohort#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 estimateUnrankedNot in the 44-model eligible cohort#2 of 44$0.0087 per LiveBench case
EfficiencyHigher is better · MM Efficiency v1.5UnrankedNot 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$0.050Openrouter · Sep 22, 2026$0.075Z.ai · Aug 29, 2026
Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens$0.080Openrouter · Sep 22, 2026$0.25Z.ai · Aug 29, 2026
Context windowMaximum documented tokens131K1,000K
Model facts checkedAug 28, 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

All benchmark results →
BenchmarkLlama-3.1-8B-InstructGLM-5.3-Flash
LMArena Text Arenatext-2026-09-13-d25aabda0010 · arena_rating · leader1,186.4881% of row best · rating · llama-3.1-8b-instruct; 95% CI [1182.38141125, 1190.58254982]; votes 49605; rank 3131,471.89100% of row best · rating · glm-5.3-flash; 95% CI [1465.37026588, 1478.41920488]; votes 10038; rank 24
ToneBench2026-09-11-10-task-4ef099199c9c · overall_score · unverified47.9254% of row best · points · Llama 3.1 8B · 1,165 output tokens / case88.19100% of row best · points · GLM-5.3 Flash · 25,960 output tokens / case
Overall ResultCounted from the protocol-matched rows above0 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

FieldLlama-3.1-8B-InstructGLM-5.3-Flash
DeveloperMetaZ.ai
FamilyLlama 3 1 8b InstructGlm 5 3 Flash
ModelLlama-3.1-8B-InstructGLM-5.3-Flash
VersionLlama-3.1-8B-InstructGLM-5.3-Flash
Lifecycleactiveactive
Released2024-07-232026-09-02
Knowledge cutoffUnknownUnknown
Input modalitiesTextText, Image, Video, Document
Output modalitiesTextText
Context window131K1,000K
Total parameters8B320B
Active parametersUnknown18B
Licensellama3.1MIT
Open weightsYesYes
API availableYesYes
Self-hostableYesYes
Provider accessHugging Face (Standard), Openrouter (Standard)Deepinfra (Standard), Fireworks Ai (Standard), Together Ai (Standard), Z.ai (Standard)
Capabilitieschat, generation, toolsagents, chat, computer-use, reasoning, structured_outputs, tools, vision

Llama 3.1 8B Instruct Capabilities

chatgenerationtools
Serving providers2
Canonical IDmeta-llama/Llama-3.1-8B-Instruct

GLM 5.3 Flash Capabilities

agentschatcomputer-usereasoningstructured outputstoolsvision
Serving providers4
Canonical IDzai-org/glm-5.3-flash

Primary Evidence

Sources and Freshness

Questions

Llama 3.1 8B Instruct vs GLM 5.3 Flash FAQs

Is Llama 3.1 8B Instruct or GLM 5.3 Flash better for coding?+

This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Llama 3.1 8B Instruct and GLM 5.3 Flash, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.

Which is cheaper, Llama 3.1 8B Instruct or GLM 5.3 Flash?+

Llama 3.1 8B Instruct is $0.050 and GLM 5.3 Flash is $0.075 per million tokens, so Llama 3.1 8B Instruct is cheaper on this metric. Llama 3.1 8B Instruct is $0.080 and GLM 5.3 Flash is $0.25 per million tokens, so Llama 3.1 8B Instruct is cheaper on this metric.

Which has a larger context window, Llama 3.1 8B Instruct or GLM 5.3 Flash?+

GLM 5.3 Flash has the larger sourced context window. Llama 3.1 8B Instruct supports 131K and GLM 5.3 Flash supports 1,000K.

Which performs better in benchmarks, Llama 3.1 8B Instruct or GLM 5.3 Flash?+

There is no overall benchmark winner: At least two independently verified, protocol-matched benchmarks are required for an overall winner.

Can Llama 3.1 8B Instruct or GLM 5.3 Flash be self-hosted?+

Both models have the same recorded self-hosting status: supported. Llama 3.1 8B Instruct is open weight; GLM 5.3 Flash is open weight.

Can Llama 3.1 8B Instruct and GLM 5.3 Flash understand images?+

Llama 3.1 8B Instruct is not 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, Llama 3.1 8B Instruct or GLM 5.3 Flash?+

Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. Llama 3.1 8B Instruct is — and GLM 5.3 Flash is 131K.

Do Llama 3.1 8B Instruct and GLM 5.3 Flash support reasoning and tool use?+

Llama 3.1 8B Instruct: tool calling. GLM 5.3 Flash: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Feature support does not establish relative quality.

Which is available from more inference providers, Llama 3.1 8B Instruct or GLM 5.3 Flash?+

Llama 3.1 8B Instruct has 2 sourced provider routes; GLM 5.3 Flash has 4, so GLM 5.3 Flash has broader tracked availability.

Which offers better value, Llama 3.1 8B Instruct 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.

Send Feedback