MolmoAct 2 vs GLM 5.3 Flash
At a Glance
| Compare |  MolmoAct 2Ai2 |  GLM 5.3 FlashZ.ai |
|---|---|---|
| Intelligence, Cost, and Efficiency | ||
| IntelligenceHigher is better · MM Intelligence v2.5 | UnrankedNot 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 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 | ||
| Context windowMaximum documented tokens | Not reported | 1,000K |
| Model facts checked | Aug 29, 2026View model evidence → | Sep 2, 2026View model evidence → |
Available Benchmarks
Side-by-Side Facts
| Field | MolmoAct 2 | GLM-5.3-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Developer | Ai2 | Z.ai |
| Family | MolmoAct 2 | Glm 5 3 Flash |
| Model | MolmoAct 2 | GLM-5.3-Flash |
| Version | 2 | GLM-5.3-Flash |
| Lifecycle | active | active |
| Released | 2026-05-05 | 2026-09-02 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Unknown | Unknown |
| Input modalities | Text, Image, Robot state | Text, Image, Video, Document |
| Output modalities | Robot action | Text |
| Context window | Unknown | 1,000K |
| Total parameters | 5B | 320B |
| Active parameters | Unknown | 18B |
| License | apache-2.0 | MIT |
| Open weights | Yes | Yes |
| API available | No | Yes |
| Self-hostable | Yes | Yes |
| Provider access | Unknown | Deepinfra (Standard), Fireworks Ai (Standard), Together Ai (Standard), Z.ai (Standard) |
| Capabilities | action-reasoning, bimanual-manipulation, depth-reasoning, fine-tuning | agents, chat, computer-use, reasoning, structured_outputs, tools, vision |
| Robotics model type | Action reasoning model | Unknown |
| Action representation | Flow-matching continuous action expert | Unknown |
| Control architecture | Molmo 2-ER backbone with KV-cache bridge and action expert | Unknown |
| Inference location | Flexible | Unknown |
| Native control rate (Hz) | Unknown | Unknown |
| Supported embodiments | SO-100, SO-101, Franka, WidowX, bimanual YAM | Unknown |
| Training data | Open bimanual YAM, SO-100/SO-101, DROID, BC-Z, Fractal, Bridge, and prior MolmoAct data described by Ai2. | Unknown |
MolmoAct 2 Capabilities
GLM 5.3 Flash Capabilities
Related Comparisons
| A | Pair | B | Context |
|---|---|---|---|
MolmoAct 2Ai2 | vs |  GPT-6 AstraOpenAI | cross-developer peers |
MolmoAct 2Ai2 | vs | Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | cross-developer peers |
MolmoAct 2Ai2 | vs |  Gemini 3.1 ProGoogle DeepMind | cross-developer peers |
MolmoAct 2Ai2 | vs |  DeepSeek-V4.1-FlashDeepSeek | cross-developer peers |
MolmoAct 2Ai2 | vs | Grok 4.6xAI | cross-developer peers |
MolmoAct 2Ai2 | vs |  Qwen3.8-MaxQwen | cross-developer peers |
MolmoAct 2Ai2 | vs |  Kimi-K3Moonshot AI | cross-developer peers |
 MiniMax-M3MiniMax | vs | MolmoAct 2Ai2 | cross-developer peers |
MolmoAct 2Ai2 | vs | GLM-5.3Z.ai | cross-developer peers |
MolmoAct 2Ai2 | vs |  Hy4 previewTencent | cross-developer peers |
MolmoAct 2Ai2 | vs | Seed 2.1 ProByteDance Seed | cross-developer peers |
MolmoAct 2Ai2 | vs |  Mistral Large 3Mistral AI | cross-developer peers |
Primary Evidence
Sources and Freshness
Questions
MolmoAct 2 vs GLM 5.3 Flash FAQs
Is MolmoAct 2 or GLM 5.3 Flash better for coding?+
This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both MolmoAct 2 and GLM 5.3 Flash, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.
Which is cheaper, MolmoAct 2 or GLM 5.3 Flash?+
Only GLM 5.3 Flash has a directly sourced input price: $0.075 per million tokens. Only GLM 5.3 Flash has a directly sourced output price: $0.25 per million tokens.
Which has a larger context window, MolmoAct 2 or GLM 5.3 Flash?+
Neither model has a larger sourced context window in this comparison. MolmoAct 2 is — and GLM 5.3 Flash is 1,000K.
Which performs better in benchmarks, MolmoAct 2 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 MolmoAct 2 or GLM 5.3 Flash be self-hosted?+
Both models have the same recorded self-hosting status: supported. MolmoAct 2 is open weight; GLM 5.3 Flash is open weight.
Can MolmoAct 2 and GLM 5.3 Flash understand images?+
MolmoAct 2 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, MolmoAct 2 or GLM 5.3 Flash?+
Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. MolmoAct 2 is — and GLM 5.3 Flash is 131K.
Do MolmoAct 2 and GLM 5.3 Flash support reasoning and tool use?+
MolmoAct 2: reasoning 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, MolmoAct 2 or GLM 5.3 Flash?+
MolmoAct 2 has 0 sourced provider routes; GLM 5.3 Flash has 4, so GLM 5.3 Flash has broader tracked availability.
Which offers better value, MolmoAct 2 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.