Nova Premier 1.0 vs GLM 5.3
Updated October 21, 2026. 6 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.
Decision reading
Only GLM 5.3 has a coding score, 70.6 on the Vibe Coding Index; Nova Premier 1.0 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Compare them on price, context and the boards below.
- Shared results
- 6
- Nova Premier 1.0 only
- 7
- GLM 5.3 only
- 94
- Like-for-like categories
- 5 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.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Only GLM 5.3 has a coding score, so no call is made.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
GLM 5.3
GLM 5.3 leads, 44.8 against 9.2.
Same board, both measured
Agentic work
AA Agentic Index
No call
Only GLM 5.3 has a AA Agentic Index result, 53.1.
Directional only
Reasoning
GPQA Diamond
No call
Only GLM 5.3 has a GPQA Diamond result, 88.1%.
Directional only
Knowledge
MMLU Pro
No call
Only GLM 5.3 has a MMLU Pro result, 86.8%.
Directional only
Web design
Design Arena: websites
GLM 5.3
GLM 5.3 leads, 1295 against 835.
Same board, both measured
General
Vals Index
No call
Only GLM 5.3 has a Vals Index result, 59.7%.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
GLM 5.3
GLM 5.3 takes 1.05M tokens against 1M.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
GLM 5.3
Nova Premier 1.0 $0.0088, GLM 5.3 $0.0036 per turn.
List prices
Cost per solved task
One SWE-bench Verified task, solved
No call
Only GLM 5.3 has the number, $0.36.
Directional only
At a glance
- Coding index
- Nova Premier 1.0 not benchmarked, GLM 5.3 70.6 from 6 benchmarks.
- Widest category
- Web design, 57.5 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
- Widest single gap
- Design Arena: websites: Nova Premier 1.0 835 against GLM 5.3 1295, 57.5 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Nova Premier 1.0 $12.50 against GLM 5.3 $4.40 per million output tokens, 2.8x apart.
- Context window
- Nova Premier 1.0 takes 1M tokens, GLM 5.3 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.
| Category | Nova Premier 1.0 | Bars | GLM 5.3 | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 0 | 1 | ||
| Intelligence | 0 | 1 | ||
| Reasoning | 0 | 2 | ||
| Web design | 0 | 1 | ||
| General | 0 | 1 | ||
| All shared boards | 0 | 6 |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index01
| Benchmark | Nova Premier 1.0 | GLM 5.3 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveBench coding | Not measured | 82.8% | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| LMArena WebDev | Not measured | 1621 | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| AA Coding Index | Not measured | 74.8 | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 80.5% | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI) | Not measured | 95.4% | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI) | Not measured | 38.9% | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 78.1% | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| Code migration (Vals AI) | Not measured | 44.2% | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| ProgramBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 1.5% | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| IOI (Vals AI) | Not measured | 68.4% | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI) | Not measured | 71.5% | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| Vibe Code Bench 1-100 (Vals AI) | Not measured | 20.0% | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| SkillsBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 47.5% | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| CyberBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 72.1% | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) | 31.7% | Not measured | Only Nova Premier 1.0 measured |
| SciCode | Not measured | 59.0% | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | 6.8% | Not measured | Only Nova Premier 1.0 measured |
| FrontierCode | Not measured | 40.1% | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| FrontierSWE | Not measured | 30.2% | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| WeirdML | Not measured | 75.4% | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| ALE-Bench | 147.4 | 1317.4 | GLM 5.3 |
| LMArena Text: coding | Not measured | 1497 | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| LMArena Text: software and IT | Not measured | 1493 | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| LMArena WebDev: React | Not measured | 1641 | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| LMArena WebDev: HTML | Not measured | 1595 | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | Nova Premier 1.0 | GLM 5.3 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 9.2 | 44.8 | GLM 5.3 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | Not measured | 156.0 | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index17 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Nova Premier 1.0 | GLM 5.3 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Agentic Index | Not measured | 53.1 | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| Design Arena: agents building mobile apps | Not measured | 1194 | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| Design Arena: HTML slides | Not measured | 1189 | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| Design Arena: PowerPoint slides | Not measured | 1255 | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| LiveBench research | Not measured | 73.2% | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| LiveBench browser | Not measured | 0.0% | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| LiveBench long agentic | Not measured | 35.9% | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| SREBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 9.2% | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| Finance Agent (Vals AI) | Not measured | 55.8% | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 39.7% | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| Legal Research Bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 49.0% | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark (Vals AI) | Not measured | 14.6% | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI) | Not measured | 56.3% | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| Terminal-Bench-Science (Vals AI) | Not measured | 5.7% | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| τ²-Bench Telecom | 38.3% | Not measured | Only Nova Premier 1.0 measured |
| APEX-Agents | Not measured | 56.6% | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| Vending-Bench 2 | Not measured | $8,164 | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 22 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
| Benchmark | Nova Premier 1.0 | GLM 5.3 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | Not measured | 88.1% | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| LiveBench reasoning | Not measured | 85.8% | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| MysteryMechanism (Vals AI) | Not measured | 23.0% | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 56.9% | 91.7% | GLM 5.3 |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 4.2% | 42.3% | GLM 5.3 |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | Not measured | 90.9% | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| Chess puzzles | Not measured | 37.0% | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| Mystery game puzzles | Not measured | 33.0% | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts | Not measured | 1490 | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| LMArena Text: expert | Not measured | 1514 | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts in English | Not measured | 1496 | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here | |||
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Nova Premier 1.0 | GLM 5.3 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Math Index | 17.3 | Not measured | Only Nova Premier 1.0 measured |
| AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run) | 17.3% | Not measured | Only Nova Premier 1.0 measured |
| OTIS Mock AIME | Not measured | 91.1% | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3 | Not measured | 68.8% | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| FrontierMath, tier 4 | Not measured | 29.3% | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| ProofBench | Not measured | 49.0% | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| LMArena Text: math | Not measured | 1495 | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| LMArena Text: mathematical work | Not measured | 1497 | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here | |||
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Nova Premier 1.0 | GLM 5.3 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro | Not measured | 86.8% | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| LegalBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 84.8% | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| TaxEval (Vals AI) | Not measured | 72.4% | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| MedCode (Vals AI) | Not measured | 42.9% | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run) | 73.3% | Not measured | Only Nova Premier 1.0 measured |
| SimpleQA Verified | Not measured | 41.0% | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| LMArena Text: science | Not measured | 1498 | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare | Not measured | 1481 | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| LMArena Text: legal and government | Not measured | 1473 | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| LMArena Text: business and finance | Not measured | 1459 | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here | |||
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | Nova Premier 1.0 | GLM 5.3 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: websites | 835 | 1295 | GLM 5.3 |
| Design Arena: UI components | Not measured | 1314 | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| Design Arena: game dev | Not measured | 1311 | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| Design Arena: data viz | Not measured | 1259 | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| Design Arena: 3D | Not measured | 1332 | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| Design Arena: all code categories | Not measured | 1304 | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| Design Arena: SVG | Not measured | 1293 | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| Design Arena: ASCII art | Not measured | 1213 | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| LiveBench design | Not measured | 77.3% | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | Nova Premier 1.0 | GLM 5.3 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vals Index | Not measured | 59.7% | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| LiveBench data analysis | Not measured | 70.2% | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 68.5% | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| MedScribe (Vals AI) | Not measured | 88.8% | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| IFBench | 36.2% | Not measured | Only Nova Premier 1.0 measured |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 34.3% | 79.7% | GLM 5.3 |
| DTBench | Not measured | 87.7% | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| LMCA | Not measured | 55.5% | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| LMArena Text | Not measured | 1474 | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| LMArena Text: instruction following | Not measured | 1479 | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| LMArena Text: creative writing | Not measured | 1458 | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| LMArena Text: English | Not measured | 1482 | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| LMArena Text: non-English | Not measured | 1459 | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| LMArena Text: Chinese | Not measured | 1532 | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| LMArena Text: German | Not measured | 1488 | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| LMArena Text: Japanese | Not measured | 1460 | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| LMArena Text: Korean | Not measured | 1460 | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| LMArena Text: French | Not measured | 1503 | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| LMArena Text: Spanish | Not measured | 1462 | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| LMArena Text: Russian | Not measured | 1469 | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| LMArena Text: Polish | Not measured | 1466 | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| LMArena Text: multi-turn | Not measured | 1472 | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| LMArena Text: longer queries | Not measured | 1483 | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| LMArena Text: writing and language | Not measured | 1469 | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| LMArena Text: entertainment and media | Not measured | 1447 | Only GLM 5.3 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 21 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Nova Premier 1.0 | GLM 5.3 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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
GLM 5.3 costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
GLM 5.3 costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
GLM 5.3 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.
| Specification | Amazon Nova Premier 1.0 | Z.ai GLM 5.3 |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Amazon | Z.ai |
| Weights | No public weights listed | Open weights |
| Released | October 31, 2025 | August 18, 2026 |
| Context window | 1M | 1.05M |
| Input $/Mtok | $2.50 | $1.40 |
| Output $/Mtok | $12.50 | $4.40 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | 70.6 |
| Independent measurements behind it | 0 | 6 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | $0.36 |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Nova Premier 1.0 better than GLM 5.3 for coding?
Only GLM 5.3 has a coding score, 70.6 on the Vibe Coding Index; Nova Premier 1.0 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Compare them on price, context and the boards below.
Which is cheaper, Nova Premier 1.0 or GLM 5.3?
Nova Premier 1.0 costs $2.50 per million input tokens and $12.50 per million output tokens; GLM 5.3 costs $1.40 and $4.40. Cost per solved task is known for GLM 5.3 only.
Which has the bigger context window, Nova Premier 1.0 or GLM 5.3?
GLM 5.3, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.
How many benchmarks is the Nova Premier 1.0 vs GLM 5.3 comparison based on?
6 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Nova Premier 1.0's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and GLM 5.3's on 6. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.