Pairwise benchmark snapshot · Aug 16, 2026

GLM-5.3 vs Qwen3 235B benchmark

Name: GLM-5.3 vs Qwen3 235B AI benchmark comparison
Creator: CompareLLM
License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

This page compares GLM-5.3 (Zhipu) and Qwen3 235B (Alibaba) using the latest snapshots we have as of Aug 16, 2026. On preference Elo, GLM-5.3 is ahead by 118 points (1,558 vs 1,440; seed-bootstrap (Aug 16, 2026)). On SWE-bench coding, GLM-5.3 resolves 76.4% versus 59.4% (seed-bootstrap (Aug 16, 2026)). GLM-5.3 streams faster (90 tok/s) while GLM-5.3 is the cheaper output token ($1.8/1M). GLM-5.3 has the larger context window (200k tokens). Every cell below is a dated snapshot from a named public source — we do not invent missing scores, and we do not run SWE-bench ourselves.

Share Analysis:

WhatsApp Telegram X / Post LinkedIn Reddit

Zhipu

GLM-5.3

Z.ai Aug 14 2026 post-train of the GLM-5.2 744B base. Coding-plan live; open weights promised after a two-week safety review (z.ai/blog/glm-5.3).

Elo 1,558$1.8/1M out

Alibaba

Qwen3 235B

Open-weight Qwen3 mixture-of-experts.

Elo 1,440$1.8199999999999998/1M out

Swap or Add Any Model to this Matchup

Instant pairwise benchmark recalculation across 400+ LLMs

Model A

Model B

Quick vs:vs Claude Opus 4.5 vs Claude Opus 4.6 vs Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs Claude 3.7 Sonnet

Interactive Comparison Diagram

Matchup Breakdown

Tug-of-War Matchup Matrix

Category wins across intelligence, speed, and pricing efficiency.

GLM-5.3 (9)vsQwen3 235B (1)

GLM-5.3: 9W (90%)Overall: GLM-5.3Qwen3 235B: 1W (10%)

← GLM-5.3Qwen3 235B →

GLM-5.3 (5/5)

Intelligence & Reasoning

Preference Elo, Coding proficiency, SWE-bench & LiveBench accuracy

Preference Elo

1,558vs1,440

Coding Elo

1,586vs—

SWE-bench

76.4%vs59.4%

LiveBench

70.8%vs63.5%

GPQA Diamond

83.2%vs76.8%

GLM-5.3: 5WQwen3 235B: 0W

GLM-5.3 (2/2)

Speed & Latency

Generation throughput and time to first token responsiveness

Output speed

90 tok/svs74 tok/s

Time to first token

255 msvs320 ms

GLM-5.3: 2WQwen3 235B: 0W

GLM-5.3 (2/3)

Pricing & Capacity

Cost per million tokens and max context window length

Output price

$1.8/1Mvs$1.82/1M

Input price

$0.5/1Mvs$0.45/1M

Context window

200kvs131k

GLM-5.3: 2WQwen3 235B: 1W

Capability Matchup Radar

Multi-Dimensional Capability Radar

Each spoke is a skill. Farther from the center is better (0–100th percentile). Tap any dot to inspect details.

Tap any node to inspect

Percentile 0–100

Dimensional AdvantageGLM-5.3 6/6

Preference Elo

GLM-5.3

118 pts advantage

Throughput Speed

GLM-5.3

16 tok/s faster

Price Efficiency

GLM-5.3

$0.02/1M cheaper

Full Benchmark Score Matrix

—

Elo

High is better

+8%1,558

EloHigh is better

1,440

Code Elo

High is better

1,586

Code EloHigh is better

—

LiveBench

High is better

+11%70.8%

LiveBenchHigh is better

63.5%

SWE-bench

High is better

+29%76.4%

SWE-benchHigh is better

59.4%

GPQA

High is better

+8%83.2%

GPQAHigh is better

76.8%

TTFT

Low is better

+25%255 ms

TTFTLow is better

320 ms

Speed

High is better

+22%90 tok/s

SpeedHigh is better

74 tok/s

In $

Low is better

$0.5/1M

In $Low is better

$0.45/1M+10%

Out $

Low is better

+1%$1.8/1M

Out $Low is better

$1.82/1M

Context

High is better

+53%200k

ContextHigh is better

131k

Interactive Simulator

Workload Cost & Savings Calculator

Simulate monthly production API costs based on published $/1M tokens.

Save up to 3% with Qwen3 235B

Monthly Volume50M tokens/mo

Quick Presets:

Token Ratio (In vs Out)70% In / 30% Out

RAG / Search (10% out)Coding / Chat (50% out)

GLM-5.3$44.50 / mo

In: $17.50Out: $27.00

Qwen3 235B$43.22 / mo

In: $15.92Out: $27.30

Estimated Cost Delta

Qwen3 235B is estimated to save $1.28/month ($15/year).

Based on 50M tokens (30% gen)

Key Selection Recommendations

1
GLM-5.3:Pick GLM-5.3 when repo-level coding accuracy is the constraint.
2
GLM-5.3:Pick GLM-5.3 when time-to-first-token matters more than peak Elo.
3
GLM-5.3:Pick GLM-5.3 as the default general assistant.

Recommended Workload Routing

Repo / coding agentsGLM-5.3

Higher SWE-bench (76.4%).

High-volume chatGLM-5.3

Lower output list price ($1.8/1M).

Voice / low-latency UIGLM-5.3

Lower TTFT (255 ms).

Long-document RAGGLM-5.3

Larger window (200k).

Screenshots / visionGLM-5.3

GLM-5.3 is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Target Workload	Recommended Pick	Evaluation Rationale
Repo / coding agents	GLM-5.3	Higher SWE-bench (76.4%).
High-volume chat	GLM-5.3	Lower output list price ($1.8/1M).
Voice / low-latency UI	GLM-5.3	Lower TTFT (255 ms).
Long-document RAG	GLM-5.3	Larger window (200k).
Screenshots / vision	GLM-5.3	GLM-5.3 is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Related Editorial Dispatches & Benchmark Notes

View all news

launchAug 14, 2026

GLM-5.3 (Aug 14): Z.ai post-train of the 5.2 744B base

Coding-plan live; open weights promised after a two-week safety review. Newest Zhipu row.

launchJun 18, 2026

GLM-5.2 remains the prior Zhipu flagship for upgrade pairs

Strong Chinese/English coding. 5.3 is the new row; 5.2 stays so the delta is visible.

launchSep 20, 2025

Qwen3 235B: the open MoE Qwen, not the Max SKU

Sep 2025 open-weight mixture-of-experts. Self-host path. Don’t confuse it with Qwen 3 Max.

Community Sentiment

Cast Your Matchup Vote

0 total votes

Community Discussions (0)

No comments posted on this matchup yet. Be the first to share an evaluation note!

Share card

The real PNG is generated at /compare/glm-5-3-vs-qwen-3-235b/opengraph-image for crawlers.

PNG

CompareLLM Matrix

Verified head-to-head card

LIVE

Zhipu

GLM-5.3

Elo 1,558

LiveBench70.8%

SWE-bench76.4%

Speed90 tok/s

Output cost$1.8/1M

Alibaba

Qwen3 235B

Elo 1,440

LiveBench63.5%

SWE-bench59.4%

Speed74 tok/s

Output cost$1.82/1M

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is better overall, GLM-5.3 or Qwen3 235B?: GLM-5.3 has the higher preference Elo in our latest snapshot (1,558). “Better” still depends on coding, price, and latency — see the table.
Which is better at coding, GLM-5.3 or Qwen3 235B?: GLM-5.3 leads SWE-bench at 76.4% vs 59.4%. SWE-bench is one harness, not your repo.
Which is cheaper to run in production?: GLM-5.3 output tokens are $1.8/1M versus $1.82/1M. Input prices and retry rates still move the real bill.
Which is faster, GLM-5.3 or Qwen3 235B?: GLM-5.3 has the lower time-to-first-token (255 ms vs 320 ms). Tokens/sec is a separate column if you care about long completions.
Which has the larger context window?: GLM-5.3 accepts 200k tokens versus 131k.
Can I self-host either model?: Qwen3 235B is marked open-weights in our catalog. The other side is a closed API. Check the provider license before you ship weights.
Are these scores from CompareLLM’s own evals?: No. V1 aggregates public leaderboards (and optional first-party latency pings). Each cell names its source and date. Read /methodology.
What does preference Elo mean on this page?: Preference Elo is a crowd vote from LMArena / Arena. People see two hidden answers and pick the one they like more. The model that wins more often gets a higher Elo. That means people preferred it — not that it passed a school test. It is not SWE-bench, not accuracy, and not a number we invent. GLM-5.3 and Qwen3 235B Elo cells are dated snapshots from the named source — we do not compute Arena ourselves.

Similar Head-to-Head Comparisons

All GLM-5.3 matchups →|All Qwen3 235B matchups →

GLM-5.3 vs GLM-5.2 (previous glm)Qwen3 235B vs Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B (previous qwen)Qwen3 235B vs Qwen QwQ 32B (next qwen)Qwen 3 Max vs GLM-5.3 GLM-5.2 vs Qwen3 235B GPT-5 vs GLM-5.3

GLM-5.3 vs Qwen3 235B benchmark

Interactive Comparison Diagram

Matchup Breakdown

Tug-of-War Matchup Matrix

Category wins across intelligence, speed, and pricing efficiency.

GLM-5.3 (9)vsQwen3 235B (1)

GLM-5.3: 9W (90%)Overall: GLM-5.3Qwen3 235B: 1W (10%)

← GLM-5.3Qwen3 235B →

GLM-5.3 (5/5)

Intelligence & Reasoning

Preference Elo, Coding proficiency, SWE-bench & LiveBench accuracy

Preference Elo

1,558vs1,440

Coding Elo

1,586vs—

SWE-bench

76.4%vs59.4%

LiveBench

70.8%vs63.5%

GPQA Diamond

83.2%vs76.8%

GLM-5.3: 5WQwen3 235B: 0W

GLM-5.3 (2/2)

Speed & Latency

Generation throughput and time to first token responsiveness

Output speed

90 tok/svs74 tok/s

Time to first token

255 msvs320 ms

GLM-5.3: 2WQwen3 235B: 0W

GLM-5.3 (2/3)

Pricing & Capacity

Cost per million tokens and max context window length

Output price

$1.8/1Mvs$1.82/1M

Input price

$0.5/1Mvs$0.45/1M

Context window

200kvs131k

GLM-5.3: 2WQwen3 235B: 1W

Recommended Workload Routing

Repo / coding agentsGLM-5.3

Higher SWE-bench (76.4%).

High-volume chatGLM-5.3

Lower output list price ($1.8/1M).

Voice / low-latency UIGLM-5.3

Lower TTFT (255 ms).

Long-document RAGGLM-5.3

Larger window (200k).

Screenshots / visionGLM-5.3

GLM-5.3 is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Target Workload	Recommended Pick	Evaluation Rationale
Repo / coding agents	GLM-5.3	Higher SWE-bench (76.4%).
High-volume chat	GLM-5.3	Lower output list price ($1.8/1M).
Voice / low-latency UI	GLM-5.3	Lower TTFT (255 ms).
Long-document RAG	GLM-5.3	Larger window (200k).
Screenshots / vision	GLM-5.3	GLM-5.3 is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is better overall, GLM-5.3 or Qwen3 235B?

GLM-5.3 has the higher preference Elo in our latest snapshot (1,558). “Better” still depends on coding, price, and latency — see the table.

Which is better at coding, GLM-5.3 or Qwen3 235B?

GLM-5.3 leads SWE-bench at 76.4% vs 59.4%. SWE-bench is one harness, not your repo.

Which is cheaper to run in production?

GLM-5.3 output tokens are $1.8/1M versus $1.82/1M. Input prices and retry rates still move the real bill.

Which is faster, GLM-5.3 or Qwen3 235B?

GLM-5.3 has the lower time-to-first-token (255 ms vs 320 ms). Tokens/sec is a separate column if you care about long completions.

Which has the larger context window?

GLM-5.3 accepts 200k tokens versus 131k.

Can I self-host either model?

Qwen3 235B is marked open-weights in our catalog. The other side is a closed API. Check the provider license before you ship weights.

Are these scores from CompareLLM’s own evals?

No. V1 aggregates public leaderboards (and optional first-party latency pings). Each cell names its source and date. Read /methodology.

What does preference Elo mean on this page?

Preference Elo is a crowd vote from LMArena / Arena. People see two hidden answers and pick the one they like more. The model that wins more often gets a higher Elo. That means people preferred it — not that it passed a school test. It is not SWE-bench, not accuracy, and not a number we invent. GLM-5.3 and Qwen3 235B Elo cells are dated snapshots from the named source — we do not compute Arena ourselves.

Swap or Add Any Model to this Matchup

Interactive Comparison Diagram

Tug-of-War Matchup Matrix

Intelligence & Reasoning

Speed & Latency

Pricing & Capacity

Multi-Dimensional Capability Radar

GLM-5.3

GLM-5.3

GLM-5.3

Full Benchmark Score Matrix

Workload Cost & Savings Calculator

Key Selection Recommendations

Recommended Workload Routing

Related Editorial Dispatches & Benchmark Notes

GLM-5.3 (Aug 14): Z.ai post-train of the 5.2 744B base

GLM-5.2 remains the prior Zhipu flagship for upgrade pairs

Qwen3 235B: the open MoE Qwen, not the Max SKU

Cast Your Matchup Vote

Community Discussions (0)

Share card

CompareLLM Matrix

GLM-5.3

Qwen3 235B

Frequently Asked Questions

Related news

Similar Head-to-Head Comparisons

Swap or Add Any Model to this Matchup

Interactive Comparison Diagram

Tug-of-War Matchup Matrix

Intelligence & Reasoning

Speed & Latency

Pricing & Capacity

Multi-Dimensional Capability Radar

GLM-5.3

GLM-5.3

GLM-5.3

Full Benchmark Score Matrix

Workload Cost & Savings Calculator

Key Selection Recommendations

Recommended Workload Routing

Related Editorial Dispatches & Benchmark Notes

GLM-5.3 (Aug 14): Z.ai post-train of the 5.2 744B base

GLM-5.2 remains the prior Zhipu flagship for upgrade pairs

Qwen3 235B: the open MoE Qwen, not the Max SKU

Cast Your Matchup Vote

Community Discussions (0)

Share card

CompareLLM Matrix

GLM-5.3

Qwen3 235B

Frequently Asked Questions

Related news

Similar Head-to-Head Comparisons