Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Nova 2 Lite vs GLM 5.3 Flash

Updated October 21, 2026. 31 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.

Replace Nova 2 Lite Replace GLM 5.3 Flash
Nova 2 LiteAmazon
Coding
No data
Overall
13.4
Output $/M
$2.50
0
GLM 5.3 FlashZ.ai
Coding
57.7
Overall
41.8
Output $/M
$0.50
31
vs boards won of 31 shared

Decision reading

Only GLM 5.3 Flash has a coding score, 57.7 on the Vibe Coding Index; Nova 2 Lite has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Compare them on price, context and the boards below.

Model ANova 2 LiteAmazonNot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved taskModel BGLM 5.3 FlashZ.ai57.7/1006 independent benchmarks$0.02 per solved task
Shared results
31
Nova 2 Lite only
0
GLM 5.3 Flash only
71
Like-for-like categories
6 of 9

Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results only one model has describe coverage, not superiority.

Which one for your work

Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.

At a glance

Coding index
Nova 2 Lite not benchmarked, GLM 5.3 Flash 57.7 from 6 benchmarks.
Widest category
Intelligence, 28.4 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
AA Coding Index: Nova 2 Lite 23.0 against GLM 5.3 Flash 71.5, 48.5 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Nova 2 Lite $2.50 against GLM 5.3 Flash $0.50 per million output tokens, 5.0x apart.
Context window
Nova 2 Lite takes 1M tokens, GLM 5.3 Flash 1.05M.

Benchmark by benchmark

First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryNova 2 LiteBarsGLM 5.3 FlashTies
Coding04
Intelligence01
Reasoning03
Math02
Knowledge04
General017
All shared boards031
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index04
Coding benchmarks for Nova 2 Lite and GLM 5.3 Flash
BenchmarkNova 2 LiteGLM 5.3 FlashLeader
LiveBench codingNot measured80.6%Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
LMArena WebDevNot measured1607Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
AA Coding Index23.071.5GLM 5.3 Flash
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)Not measured80.5%Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)Not measured92.0%Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI)Not measured37.4%Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)Not measured30.8%Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
Code migration (Vals AI)Not measured20.5%Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
ProgramBench (Vals AI)Not measured0.0%Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
IOI (Vals AI)Not measured52.5%Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)Not measured62.9%Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
Vibe Code Bench 1-100 (Vals AI)Not measured16.0%Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
SkillsBench (Vals AI)Not measured40.2%Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
CyberBench (Vals AI)Not measured67.9%Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
SciCodeNot measured51.6%Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
FrontierCodeNot measured31.8%Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
FrontierSWENot measured18.1%Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
ALE-Bench236.3303.6GLM 5.3 Flash
LMArena Text: coding13851507GLM 5.3 Flash
LMArena Text: software and IT13941500GLM 5.3 Flash
LMArena WebDev: ReactNot measured1624Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
LMArena WebDev: HTMLNot measured1577Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
LMArena WebDev: from an imageNot measured1578Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for Nova 2 Lite and GLM 5.3 Flash
BenchmarkNova 2 LiteGLM 5.3 FlashLeader
AA Intelligence Index13.441.8GLM 5.3 Flash
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured153.1Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index12 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for Nova 2 Lite and GLM 5.3 Flash
BenchmarkNova 2 LiteGLM 5.3 FlashLeader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured50.9Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
LiveBench researchNot measured70.1%Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
LiveBench browserNot measured84.0%Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
LiveBench long agenticNot measured28.4%Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
SREBench (Vals AI)Not measured0.8%Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)Not measured57.9%Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)Not measured31.6%Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)Not measured45.2%Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark (Vals AI)Not measured10.4%Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)Not measured55.9%Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
Terminal-Bench-Science (Vals AI)Not measured2.9%Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
APEX-AgentsNot measured52.8%Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
Neither model has a result on the other 27 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index03
Reasoning benchmarks for Nova 2 Lite and GLM 5.3 Flash
BenchmarkNova 2 LiteGLM 5.3 FlashLeader
GPQA DiamondNot measured86.4%Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
LiveBench reasoningNot measured77.6%Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)Not measured86.0%Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured91.2%Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured39.9%Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)Not measured90.2%Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
ARC-AGINot measured91.0%Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
ARC-AGI-2Not measured65.8%Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
Chess puzzlesNot measured21.0%Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
Mystery game puzzlesNot measured8.0%Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts13641490GLM 5.3 Flash
LMArena Text: expert13591511GLM 5.3 Flash
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English13851488GLM 5.3 Flash
LMArena Vision: diagramsNot measured1317Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
LMArena Vision: homeworkNot measured1318Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Math benchmarks for Nova 2 Lite and GLM 5.3 Flash
BenchmarkNova 2 LiteGLM 5.3 FlashLeader
OTIS Mock AIMENot measured93.9%Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3Not measured55.8%Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
FrontierMath, tier 4Not measured17.1%Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
ProofBenchNot measured21.0%Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
LMArena Text: math13591503GLM 5.3 Flash
LMArena Text: mathematical work13691497GLM 5.3 Flash
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
Knowledge benchmarks for Nova 2 Lite and GLM 5.3 Flash
BenchmarkNova 2 LiteGLM 5.3 FlashLeader
MMLU ProNot measured86.1%Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)Not measured83.9%Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)Not measured75.6%Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
LMArena Text: science13821484GLM 5.3 Flash
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare13861475GLM 5.3 Flash
LMArena Text: legal and government13591473GLM 5.3 Flash
LMArena Text: business and finance13691460GLM 5.3 Flash
Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index9 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Nova 2 Lite and GLM 5.3 Flash
BenchmarkNova 2 LiteGLM 5.3 FlashLeader
Design Arena: websitesNot measured1272Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
Design Arena: UI componentsNot measured1316Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
Design Arena: game devNot measured1278Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
Design Arena: data vizNot measured1261Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
Design Arena: 3DNot measured1316Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
Design Arena: all code categoriesNot measured1282Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
Design Arena: SVGNot measured1284Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
Design Arena: ASCII artNot measured1268Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
LiveBench designNot measured77.2%Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index017
General benchmarks for Nova 2 Lite and GLM 5.3 Flash
BenchmarkNova 2 LiteGLM 5.3 FlashLeader
Vals IndexNot measured50.9%Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
LiveBench data analysisNot measured76.4%Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)Not measured88.9%Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)Not measured80.0%Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
Surface Evolver BenchNot measured52.5%Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
LMArena Text13621471GLM 5.3 Flash
LMArena Text: instruction following13351478GLM 5.3 Flash
LMArena Text: creative writing12921441GLM 5.3 Flash
LMArena VisionNot measured1294Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
LMArena Text: English13851474GLM 5.3 Flash
LMArena Text: non-English13371462GLM 5.3 Flash
LMArena Text: Chinese13641531GLM 5.3 Flash
LMArena Text: German13431462GLM 5.3 Flash
LMArena Text: Japanese12731444GLM 5.3 Flash
LMArena Text: Korean12811436GLM 5.3 Flash
LMArena Text: French13811491GLM 5.3 Flash
LMArena Text: Spanish13751475GLM 5.3 Flash
LMArena Text: Russian13421465GLM 5.3 Flash
LMArena Text: Polish13271450GLM 5.3 Flash
LMArena Text: multi-turn13381469GLM 5.3 Flash
LMArena Text: longer queries13351481GLM 5.3 Flash
LMArena Text: writing and language13181455GLM 5.3 Flash
LMArena Text: entertainment and media13091440GLM 5.3 Flash
LMArena Vision: EnglishNot measured1295Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
LMArena Vision: ChineseNot measured1363Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
LMArena Vision: reading textNot measured1299Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
LMArena Vision: humorNot measured1279Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
LMArena Vision: creative writingNot measured1270Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
Neither model has a result on the other 18 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Nova 2 Lite and GLM 5.3 Flash
BenchmarkNova 2 LiteGLM 5.3 FlashLeader
Neither model has a result on 5 boards here

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.

Chat turn

1K input + 500 output tokens

Nova 2 Lite$0.0015Fits in one request
GLM 5.3 Flash$0.0004Fits in one request

GLM 5.3 Flash costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Nova 2 Lite$0.022Fits in one request
GLM 5.3 Flash$0.0090Fits in one request

GLM 5.3 Flash costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Nova 2 Lite$0.085Fits in one request
GLM 5.3 Flash$0.035Fits in one request

GLM 5.3 Flash costs less

Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.

Specification differences

The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.

Specifications of Nova 2 Lite and GLM 5.3 Flash
SpecificationAmazon Nova 2 LiteZ.ai GLM 5.3 Flash
MakerAmazonZ.ai
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedDecember 2, 2025August 26, 2026
Context window1M1.05M
Input $/Mtok$0.30$0.15
Output $/Mtok$2.50$0.50
Coding indexNot benchmarked57.7
Independent measurements behind it06
Cost per solved taskNot computable$0.02
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Nova 2 Lite better than GLM 5.3 Flash for coding?

Only GLM 5.3 Flash has a coding score, 57.7 on the Vibe Coding Index; Nova 2 Lite has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Compare them on price, context and the boards below.

Which is cheaper, Nova 2 Lite or GLM 5.3 Flash?

Nova 2 Lite costs $0.30 per million input tokens and $2.50 per million output tokens; GLM 5.3 Flash costs $0.15 and $0.50. Cost per solved task is known for GLM 5.3 Flash only.

Which has the bigger context window, Nova 2 Lite or GLM 5.3 Flash?

GLM 5.3 Flash, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.

How many benchmarks is the Nova 2 Lite vs GLM 5.3 Flash comparison based on?

31 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Nova 2 Lite's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and GLM 5.3 Flash's on 6. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next