Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs GLM 5.3

GLM 5.3 leads DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 on coding, 70.6 to 70.3 on the Vibe Coding Index, and DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 costs 7.3x less per output token ($0.60 vs $4.40 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 38 benchmarks have a result for both.

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017DeepSeek
Coding
70.3
Overall
67.6
Output $/M
$0.60
31
GLM 5.3Z.ai
Coding
70.6
Overall
67.9
Output $/M
$4.40
7
vs boards won of 38 shared

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 or GLM 5.3: which to pick

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 and GLM 5.3 are level for coding, 70.3 against 70.6 on the Vibe Coding Index, so price and context decide.

Pick DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 for output tokens 7.3x cheaper ($0.60 vs $4.40 per million) and work measured by LiveBench coding or LMArena WebDev, where it leads. Pick GLM 5.3 for work measured by Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI) or Code migration (Vals AI), where it leads.

Shared results
38
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 only
1
GLM 5.3 only
62
Like-for-like categories
8 of 9

Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.

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
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 70.3 from 4 benchmarks, GLM 5.3 70.6 from 6 benchmarks.
Widest category
Agentic work, 14.1 points apart on average over 8 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
LiveBench browser: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 76.0% against GLM 5.3 0.0%, 76.0 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 $0.60 against GLM 5.3 $4.40 per million output tokens, 7.3x apart.
Context window
Both take 1.05M tokens.

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
CategoryDeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017BarsGLM 5.3Ties
Coding63
Intelligence01
Agentic work62
Reasoning50
Math30
Knowledge10
Web design71
General30
All shared boards317
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index63
Coding benchmarks for DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 and GLM 5.3
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017GLM 5.3Leader
LiveBench coding96.0%82.8%DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
LMArena WebDev16641621DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
AA Coding IndexNot measured74.8Only GLM 5.3 measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)Not measured80.5%Only GLM 5.3 measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)Not measured95.4%Only GLM 5.3 measured
Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI)31.8%38.9%GLM 5.3
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)87.7%78.1%DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
Code migration (Vals AI)44.2%44.2%GLM 5.3
ProgramBench (Vals AI)Not measured1.5%Only GLM 5.3 measured
IOI (Vals AI)Not measured68.4%Only GLM 5.3 measured
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)Not measured71.5%Only GLM 5.3 measured
Vibe Code Bench 1-100 (Vals AI)Not measured20.0%Only GLM 5.3 measured
SkillsBench (Vals AI)Not measured47.5%Only GLM 5.3 measured
CyberBench (Vals AI)Not measured72.1%Only GLM 5.3 measured
SciCode55.9%59.0%GLM 5.3
FrontierCodeNot measured40.1%Only GLM 5.3 measured
FrontierSWENot measured30.2%Only GLM 5.3 measured
WeirdMLNot measured75.4%Only GLM 5.3 measured
ALE-Bench1622.01317.4DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
LMArena Text: codingNot measured1497Only GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: software and ITNot measured1493Only GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena WebDev: React16671641DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
LMArena WebDev: HTML16871595DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 and GLM 5.3
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017GLM 5.3Leader
AA Intelligence Index39.544.8GLM 5.3
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured156.0Only GLM 5.3 measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index62
Agentic work benchmarks for DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 and GLM 5.3
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017GLM 5.3Leader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured53.1Only GLM 5.3 measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile appsNot measured1194Only GLM 5.3 measured
Design Arena: HTML slidesNot measured1189Only GLM 5.3 measured
Design Arena: PowerPoint slidesNot measured1230Only GLM 5.3 measured
Design Arena: spreadsheets1245Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 measured
LiveBench research79.5%73.2%DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
LiveBench browser76.0%0.0%DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
LiveBench long agentic50.9%35.9%DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
SREBench (Vals AI)Not measured9.2%Only GLM 5.3 measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)57.0%55.8%DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)44.4%39.7%DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)45.2%49.0%GLM 5.3
Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark (Vals AI)14.2%14.6%GLM 5.3
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)61.8%56.3%DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
Terminal-Bench-Science (Vals AI)Not measured5.7%Only GLM 5.3 measured
APEX-AgentsNot measured56.6%Only GLM 5.3 measured
Vending-Bench 2Not measured$8,164Only GLM 5.3 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 24 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index50
Reasoning benchmarks for DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 and GLM 5.3
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017GLM 5.3Leader
GPQA DiamondNot measured88.1%Only GLM 5.3 measured
LiveBench reasoning89.1%85.8%DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
MysteryMechanism (Vals AI)Not measured23.0%Only GLM 5.3 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured91.7%Only GLM 5.3 measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)43.3%42.3%DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)93.2%90.9%DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
Chess puzzles46.0%37.0%DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
Mystery game puzzles49.0%33.0%DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
LMArena Text: hard promptsNot measured1490Only GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: expertNot measured1514Only GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in EnglishNot measured1496Only GLM 5.3 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index30
Math benchmarks for DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 and GLM 5.3
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017GLM 5.3Leader
OTIS Mock AIME99.4%91.1%DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 371.2%68.8%DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
FrontierMath, tier 446.3%29.3%DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
ProofBenchNot measured49.0%Only GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: mathNot measured1495Only GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: mathematical workNot measured1497Only GLM 5.3 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Knowledge benchmarks for DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 and GLM 5.3
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017GLM 5.3Leader
MMLU ProNot measured86.8%Only GLM 5.3 measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)Not measured84.8%Only GLM 5.3 measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)Not measured72.4%Only GLM 5.3 measured
MedCode (Vals AI)Not measured42.9%Only GLM 5.3 measured
SimpleQA Verified42.5%41.0%DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
LMArena Text: scienceNot measured1498Only GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcareNot measured1481Only GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: legal and governmentNot measured1473Only GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: business and financeNot measured1459Only GLM 5.3 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index71
Web design benchmarks for DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 and GLM 5.3
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017GLM 5.3Leader
Design Arena: websites13111295DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
Design Arena: UI components13031314GLM 5.3
Design Arena: game dev13571311DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
Design Arena: data viz13301260DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
Design Arena: 3D13581332DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
Design Arena: all code categories13321304DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
Design Arena: SVGNot measured1294Only GLM 5.3 measured
Design Arena: ASCII art12421208DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
LiveBench design83.4%77.3%DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index30
General benchmarks for DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 and GLM 5.3
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017GLM 5.3Leader
Vals Index61.3%59.7%DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
LiveBench data analysis79.5%70.2%DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI)Not measured68.5%Only GLM 5.3 measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)Not measured88.8%Only GLM 5.3 measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)82.7%79.7%DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
DTBenchNot measured87.7%Only GLM 5.3 measured
LMCANot measured55.5%Only GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena TextNot measured1474Only GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: instruction followingNot measured1479Only GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: creative writingNot measured1458Only GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: EnglishNot measured1482Only GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: non-EnglishNot measured1459Only GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: ChineseNot measured1532Only GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: GermanNot measured1488Only GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: JapaneseNot measured1460Only GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: KoreanNot measured1460Only GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: FrenchNot measured1503Only GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: SpanishNot measured1462Only GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: RussianNot measured1469Only GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: PolishNot measured1466Only GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turnNot measured1472Only GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: longer queriesNot measured1483Only GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: writing and languageNot measured1469Only GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and mediaNot measured1447Only GLM 5.3 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 22 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 and GLM 5.3
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017GLM 5.3Leader
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

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017$0.0004Fits in one request
GLM 5.3$0.0036Fits in one request

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017$0.0093Fits in one request
GLM 5.3$0.083Fits in one request

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017$0.036Fits in one request
GLM 5.3$0.324Fits in one request

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 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 DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 and GLM 5.3
SpecificationDeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017Z.ai GLM 5.3
MakerDeepSeekZ.ai
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedOctober 17, 2026August 18, 2026
Context window1.05M1.05M
Input $/Mtok$0.15$1.40
Output $/Mtok$0.60$4.40
Coding index70.370.6
Independent measurements behind it46
Cost per solved taskNot computable$0.36
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 better than GLM 5.3 for coding?

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 and GLM 5.3 are level for coding, 70.3 against 70.6 on the Vibe Coding Index, so price and context decide. Pick DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 for output tokens 7.3x cheaper ($0.60 vs $4.40 per million) and work measured by LiveBench coding or LMArena WebDev, where it leads. Pick GLM 5.3 for work measured by Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI) or Code migration (Vals AI), where it leads.

Which is cheaper, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 or GLM 5.3?

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 costs $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.60 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, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 or GLM 5.3?

Neither: both take 1.05M tokens.

How many benchmarks is the DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs GLM 5.3 comparison based on?

38 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017's coding index rests on 4 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.

Compare next

Embed this comparison on your site

Free under CC BY 4.0, while the source link stays visible. Preview the frame · Terms and other embeds

<iframe src="https://llmbenchmark.ai/embed/compare/deepseek-v4-1-flash-1017-vs-glm-5-3" title="DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs GLM 5.3, LLMBenchmark.ai" width="100%" height="360" style="border:0;max-width:100%" loading="lazy"></iframe>
<p style="font:13px/1.4 sans-serif;margin:6px 0 0">Source: <a href="https://llmbenchmark.ai/compare/deepseek-v4-1-flash-1017-vs-glm-5-3">LLMBenchmark.ai, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs GLM 5.3</a></p>