Nova 2 Lite vs GLM 5.3 Flash
At a Glance
| Compare |  Nova 2 LiteAmazon |  GLM 5.3 FlashZ.ai |
|---|---|---|
| Intelligence, Cost, and Efficiency | ||
| IntelligenceHigher is better · MM Intelligence v4.4 | #43 of 570.0 score · 1/3 sources · single-source provisional · missing LiveBench, ARC-AGI-2 · full-core range 0.0–66.7 | #20 of 5756.2 score · 2/3 sources · provisional · missing ARC-AGI-2 · full-core range 37.5–70.8 |
| CostLower is better · Published-token output estimate | UnrankedNot in the 27-model eligible cohort | #2 of 27$0.0087 per LiveBench case |
| EfficiencyHigher is better · MM Efficiency v1.9 | UnrankedNot in the 27-model eligible cohort | #2 of 2765.8 score · 2/3 sources · provisional · missing ARC-AGI-2 · full-core range 56.4–73.1 |
| Pricing and Limits | ||
| Input priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | $0.30Amazon Bedrock ↗ · Aug 29, 2026 | $0.075Z.ai ↗ · Aug 29, 2026 |
| Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | $2.50Amazon Bedrock ↗ · Aug 29, 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 | Nova 2 Lite | GLM-5.3-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text Arenatext-2026-10-15-a64ca3b12b6e · arena_rating · leader | 1,361.8393% of row best · rating · nova-2-lite; 95% CI [1355.81915120, 1367.83207069]; votes 12413; rank 195 | 1,470.53100% of row best · rating · glm-5.3-flash; 95% CI [1465.67476412, 1475.38456118]; votes 32925; rank 29 |
| Overall ResultCounted from the protocol-matched rows above | 0 benchmark winsNo overall winner | 1 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
| Field | Nova 2 Lite | GLM-5.3-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Developer | Amazon | Z.ai |
| Family | Nova 2 | Glm 5 3 Flash |
| Model | Nova 2 Lite | GLM-5.3-Flash |
| Version | Nova 2 Lite | GLM-5.3-Flash |
| Lifecycle | active | active |
| Released | 2025-12-02 | 2026-09-02 |
| Knowledge cutoff | 2025-10-01 | Unknown |
| Input modalities | Text, Image, Video, Document | 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 | Amazon Bedrock (Standard) | Deepinfra (Standard), Fireworks Ai (Standard), Together Ai (Standard), Z.ai (Standard) |
| Capabilities | chat, generation, prompt-caching, tools, vision | agents, chat, computer-use, reasoning, structured_outputs, tools, vision |
Nova 2 Lite Capabilities
GLM 5.3 Flash Capabilities
Related Comparisons
All image comparisons →| A | Pair | B | Context |
|---|---|---|---|
 Molmo2-8BAi2 | vs | Nova 2 LiteAmazon | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Nova 2 LiteAmazon | vs |  Antigravity AgentGoogle DeepMind | cross-developer peerstext |
Nova 2 LiteAmazon | vs | Gemini 2.5 Flash-LiteGoogle DeepMind | cross-developer peerstext |
Nova 2 LiteAmazon | vs | Gemini 2.5 ProGoogle DeepMind | cross-developer peerstext |
Nova 2 LiteAmazon | vs |  Muse Spark 1.3Meta | cross-developer peersimage, text, video |
Nova 2 LiteAmazon | vs |  Pixtral LargeMistral AI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Nova 2 LiteAmazon | vs |  GPT-4.1 MiniOpenAI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Nova 2 LiteAmazon | vs | GPT-4.1 NanoOpenAI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Nova 2 LiteAmazon | vs |  InklingThinking Machines Lab | cross-developer peersimage, text, video |
Nova 2 LiteAmazon | vs | GLM-5V-TurboZ.ai | cross-developer peersimage, text, video |
Primary Evidence
Sources and Freshness
Questions
Nova 2 Lite vs GLM 5.3 Flash FAQs
Is Nova 2 Lite or GLM 5.3 Flash better for coding?+
This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Nova 2 Lite and GLM 5.3 Flash, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.
Which is cheaper, Nova 2 Lite or GLM 5.3 Flash?+
Nova 2 Lite is $0.30 and GLM 5.3 Flash is $0.075 per million tokens, so GLM 5.3 Flash is cheaper on this metric. Nova 2 Lite 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, Nova 2 Lite or GLM 5.3 Flash?+
Both models have the same sourced context window: 1,000,000 tokens each.
Which performs better in benchmarks, Nova 2 Lite 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 Nova 2 Lite or GLM 5.3 Flash be self-hosted?+
GLM 5.3 Flash is documented as self-hostable; Nova 2 Lite is documented as not self-hostable. Nova 2 Lite is not marked open weight; GLM 5.3 Flash is open weight.
Can Nova 2 Lite and GLM 5.3 Flash understand images?+
Nova 2 Lite 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, Nova 2 Lite or GLM 5.3 Flash?+
GLM 5.3 Flash has the larger sourced maximum output. Nova 2 Lite supports 65,536 tokens and GLM 5.3 Flash supports 131,072 tokens.
Do Nova 2 Lite and GLM 5.3 Flash support reasoning and tool use?+
Nova 2 Lite: 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, Nova 2 Lite or GLM 5.3 Flash?+
Nova 2 Lite has 1 sourced provider route; GLM 5.3 Flash has 4, so GLM 5.3 Flash has broader tracked availability.
Which offers better value, Nova 2 Lite 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.