GLM 5.3 Flash coding benchmark
Z.ai · API model z-ai/glm-5.3-flash · via OpenRouter · Results published 25 Oct 2026 · Benchmark v4
How GLM 5.3 Flash performed
GLM 5.3 Flash by Z.ai took the PomBench AI coding benchmark: every model gets the same prompt and writes self-contained browser code for a twelve-second scene: a Pomeranian runs across a backyard, jumps a puddle, enters its doghouse, retrieves a bone and turns toward the viewer. The video above is an independent offline browser recording of the code GLM 5.3 Flash returned, captured at 960 × 540 and 30 fps, with no organizer edits to the code.
In this GLM 5.3 Flash coding test the model produced 22,545 output tokens, including provider-reported reasoning (rank 9 of 47 by output tokens), and the known API cost was $0.0116 (rank 14 of 46, cheapest first). Is GLM 5.3 Flash good at coding? One task cannot answer that on its own, so this LLM coding benchmark lets you watch the result instead of reading a score: check the gait, the puddle jump and reflection, the doorway occlusion and whether the bone stays in the dog's mouth. This run was served through OpenRouter with one fixed upstream provider and fallbacks disabled.
Then compare GLM 5.3 Flash vs GLM 5.3 and DeepSeek V4.1 Flash below, or open the AI model comparison to play up to four models on one synchronized timeline.
GLM 5.3 Flash vs GLM 5.3, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash and Gemini 3.8 Flash
- GLM 5.3 Flash vs GLM 5.3: 22,545 vs 159,201 output tokens; known API cost $0.0116 vs $0.7053. Watch side by side
- GLM 5.3 Flash vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 22,545 vs 8,357 output tokens; known API cost $0.0116 vs $0.0106. Watch side by side
- GLM 5.3 Flash vs Gemini 3.8 Flash: 22,545 vs 11,345 output tokens; known API cost $0.0116 vs $0.0441. Watch side by side
GLM 5.3 Flash code
GLM 5.3 Flash wrote its own native browser animation code from the same prompt as every other model. One execution repair is available for empty, truncated or unexecutable code; the final response is kept, not a best-of selection.