Skip to main content

AI Rankings

GLM-5.3 vs GPT-5.4: Scores, Price and Which to Choose

Side by side on every measure both models share: overall score, human votes, tests, price and context window. Close results are called too close to call.

Data updated

Read the model pages for the full picture: GLM-5.3 and GPT-5.4.

Side by side

A check mark shows the better side on each measure. Scores that are too close to call have no winner.
GLM-5.3 compared with GPT-5.4GLM-5.3 against GPT-5.4 on 11 measures. GLM-5.3 is better on 3, GPT-5.4 on 4, 4 are too close to call, 0 have no data for one side.
  • GLM-5.3
  • GPT-5.4
  1. Epoch Capabilities IndexToo close to call

    Combined score over many tests. Bar shows where it sits between the lowest and highest score we track.

    GLM-5.3:
    156.0
    GPT-5.4:
    157.3
  2. Arena text ratingToo close to call

    Rating from head-to-head votes by people. Bar shows where it sits between the lowest and highest score we track.

    GLM-5.3:
    1481
    GPT-5.4:
    1475
  3. Arena coding ratingToo close to call

    Rating from head-to-head votes by people. Bar shows where it sits between the lowest and highest score we track.

    GLM-5.3:
    1521
    GPT-5.4:
    1521
  4. Arena web development ratingGLM-5.3 leads

    Rating from head-to-head votes by people. Bar shows where it sits between the lowest and highest score we track.

    GLM-5.3:
    Better: 1623
    GPT-5.4:
    1464
  5. DeepSWEGLM-5.3 leads

    Software engineering tasks scored as the share solved on the first try (pass@1), run with the open mini-SWE-agent setup.

    GLM-5.3:
    Better: 69.0%
    GPT-5.4:
    51.8%
  6. FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)GPT-5.4 leads

    Original, very hard maths problems written by mathematicians.

    GLM-5.3:
    68.8%
    GPT-5.4:
    Better: 78.6%
  7. GPQA DiamondGPT-5.4 leads

    Very hard multiple-choice science questions in biology, physics and chemistry, written by experts and designed so a quick web search does not give the answer.

    GLM-5.3:
    90.9%
    GPT-5.4:
    Better: 93.3%
  8. OTIS Mock AIMEGPT-5.4 leads

    Maths competition problems in the style of the US AIME exam, from the 2024 and 2025 sets.

    GLM-5.3:
    91.1%
    GPT-5.4:
    Better: 97.8%
  9. SimpleQA VerifiedGPT-5.4 leads

    Short factual questions that each have one correct answer.

    GLM-5.3:
    41.0%
    GPT-5.4:
    Better: 45.1%
  10. Blended price per million tokensGLM-5.3 costs less

    Blended price: lower is better.

    GLM-5.3:
    Better: $2.15
    GPT-5.4:
    $5.63
  11. Context windowToo close to call

    How much text it can read at once.

    GLM-5.3:
    1M tokens
    GPT-5.4:
    1.1M tokens
Data updated 26 Oct 2026. Only measures that both models have are shown.

The numbers

GLM-5.3 against GPT-5.4, measure by measure. A check mark shows the better side.
MeasureGLM-5.3GPT-5.4
Epoch Capabilities IndexToo close to call156.0157.3
Arena text ratingToo close to call14811475
Arena coding ratingToo close to call15211521
Arena web development rating16231464
DeepSWE69.0%51.8%
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)68.8%78.6%
GPQA Diamond90.9%93.3%
OTIS Mock AIME91.1%97.8%
SimpleQA Verified41.0%45.1%
Blended price per million tokens$2.15$5.63
Context windowToo close to call1M tokens1.1M tokens

What it costs in everyday terms

Estimate for 100 chats of about 1,000 tokens in and 500 tokens back, from list prices. Your bill depends on how you use it.
100 chats with GLM-5.3
$0.36
Blended price $2.15 per million tokens.
100 chats with GPT-5.4
$1
Blended price $5.63 per million tokens.

Who should pick which

Pick GLM-5.3 if these matter most

  • Arena web development rating: 1623 against 1464
  • DeepSWE: 69.0% against 51.8%
  • Blended price per million tokens: $2.15 against $5.63

Pick GPT-5.4 if these matter most

  • FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3): 78.6% against 68.8%
  • GPQA Diamond: 93.3% against 90.9%
  • OTIS Mock AIME: 97.8% against 91.1%
  • SimpleQA Verified: 45.1% against 41.0%

Too close to call: Epoch Capabilities Index, Arena text rating, Arena coding rating, Context window.

Scores come from tests and votes, not from your own work. Try both on a task you care about before you commit.

Questions about this comparison

Which is better, GLM-5.3 or GPT-5.4?
GPT-5.4 scores higher on 4 of 9 shared quality measures, GLM-5.3 on 2. 3 measures are too close to call. GLM-5.3 costs about 62% less than GPT-5.4 on a blended price of $2.15 against $5.63 per million tokens. Which one is better for you depends on your task and budget, so test both on your own work.
Which is cheaper, GLM-5.3 or GPT-5.4?
GLM-5.3 is cheaper on blended price: $2.15 per million tokens for GLM-5.3 against $5.63 for GPT-5.4. For 100 chats of about 1,000 tokens in and 500 tokens back, that is about $0.36 for GLM-5.3 and $1 for GPT-5.4.
Which is better for coding, GLM-5.3 or GPT-5.4?
On Arena coding rating they are too close to call (1521 and 1521).

Where this data comes from

  • Epoch AI: Benchmark data: Epoch AI, 'Capabilities & benchmarking', epoch.ai/benchmarks (CC BY 4.0). We match models across sources, rank them and show them in charts. Scores are not changed. Epoch AI does not endorse this site.
  • Arena (formerly LMArena): Human-preference ratings: Arena (arena.ai) leaderboard dataset, CC BY 4.0. We keep the latest published ratings, match them to models from other sources and rank them. Ratings are not changed. Arena does not endorse this site.
  • LiteLLM model price list: Prices and context windows: LiteLLM model price list (github.com/BerriAI/litellm, MIT licence). We use the model maker's own price entry when there is one. Prices change often, so always confirm on the maker's site before you buy.

Newest data on this page: 26 Oct 2026. Prices are list prices and change often, so confirm on the maker's site before you buy. Sponsors never change a score or an order. How we calculate this · Report a mistake

We use optional cookies for analytics and referral tracking. Learn more about our privacy policy