Head to head

GLM 5.3 vs DeepSeek V4 Pro

GLM 5.3 scores higher on 3 of the 4 benchmarks both models publish. The widest gap is on Humanity's Last Exam (with tools), where GLM 5.3 leads by 2.5 points. Both have open weights; GLM 5.3 is far lighter to host, needing about 520 GB at 4-bit against 1.1 TB for DeepSeek V4 Pro.

Shared benchmarks

Raw published scores; the higher score on each row is highlighted. LMArena Elo is a human-preference vote and is not counted as a win.

Should you pick GLM 5.3 or DeepSeek V4 Pro?

Pick GLM 5.3 if…

  • You care most about Humanity's Last Exam (with tools), where it scores at least 2 points higher.
  • People prefer its answers in blind chats: LMArena Elo 1481 against 1465.
  • You want the lighter model to host: about 520 GB at 4-bit against 1.1 TB.

Pick DeepSeek V4 Pro if…

  • Its published results are close enough that cost and hosting should decide.

Hardware and cost to run

GLM 5.3

Even at 4-bit it needs about 520 GB (4× H200 (564 GB)), well beyond a home workstation, so most people run it on rented multi-GPU servers. Full BF16 precision needs about 1.7 TB (Multiple nodes (over 1.1 TB)).

Full GPU memory table for GLM 5.3

DeepSeek V4 Pro

Even at 4-bit it needs about 1.1 TB (8× H200 (1,128 GB)), well beyond a home workstation, so most people run it on rented multi-GPU servers. Full BF16 precision needs about 3.7 TB (Multiple nodes (over 1.1 TB)).

Full GPU memory table for DeepSeek V4 Pro

Category profile

Category index uses every test each model reports, not only the shared ones.

ReasoningCodingAgenticKnowledge
GLM 5.3DeepSeek V4 Pro
Reasoning80.686.7
Coding78.389.4
Agentic89.388.1
Knowledge—100.0

Specs side by side

GLM 5.3DeepSeek V4 Pro
LabZ.ai (Zhipu)DeepSeek
WeightsOpenOpen
Released2026-08-142026-08-13
Parameters753B total, 40B active (MoE)1.6T total, 49B active (MoE)
Context1M1M
LicenseGLM-5.3 License (custom; arena.ai lists MIT)MIT
4-bit memory520 GB · 4× H200 (564 GB)1.1 TB · 8× H200 (1,128 GB)
API price$1.40 in / $4.40 out per 1M tokens$1.32 in / $3.96 out per 1M tokens
API speed88 tok/s94 tok/s

Related comparisons

Sources

ModelTestScoreSettingSource
GLM 5.3GPQA Diamond91.7GLM 5.3 (max); competitor comparison columnMeta Muse Spark Open model card (comparison column)
DeepSeek V4 ProGPQA Diamond90.1V4-Pro (Preview) Max, pass@1Hugging Face model card (DeepSeek-V4-Pro)
GLM 5.3Humanity's Last Exam42.3no tools, text-only subset (2,158 q); competitor comparison columnMiniMax M3.1 Flash model card (comparison column)
DeepSeek V4 ProHumanity's Last Exam42.7V4-Pro-0813, no toolsHugging Face model card (DeepSeek-V4-Pro-0813)
GLM 5.3Humanity's Last Exam (with tools)62.5with toolsHugging Face model card (GLM-5.3)
DeepSeek V4 ProHumanity's Last Exam (with tools)60.0V4-Pro-0813, with toolsHugging Face model card (DeepSeek-V4-Pro-0813)
GLM 5.3Terminal-Bench88.2Terminal-Bench 2.1Hugging Face model card (GLM-5.3)
DeepSeek V4 ProTerminal-Bench87.9Terminal-Bench 2.1, V4-Pro-0813, max effort, DeepSeek HarnessHugging Face model card (DeepSeek-V4-Pro-0813)
GLM 5.3LMArena Text Elo1481GLM-5.3 (Max), ±5, board dated 2026-10-27LMArena (arena.ai) text leaderboard
DeepSeek V4 ProLMArena Text Elo1465DeepSeek-V4-Pro (High, 20260813), ±7, board dated 2026-10-27LMArena (arena.ai) text leaderboard

Scores are published results from model cards, lab reports, and public leaderboards, each linked to its source. Settings such as thinking mode or test version differ between sources and are shown next to each score. OpenLLM Buddy catalog models are uncensored fine-tunes; their scores are those of the official base model. Data collected 2026-10-30. How the index works