Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GLM 5.3 Flash vs GPT-4.1 Nano

GLM 5.3 Flash leads GPT-4.1 Nano on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 41.8 to 7.8, and GPT-4.1 Nano costs 1.3x less per output token ($0.40 vs $0.50 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 49 benchmarks have a result for both.

GLM 5.3 FlashZ.ai
Coding
57.7
Overall
66.0
Output $/M
$0.50
49
GPT-4.1 NanoOpenAI
Coding
No data
Overall
24.7
Output $/M
$0.40
0
vs boards won of 49 shared

GLM 5.3 Flash or GPT-4.1 Nano: which to pick

Only GLM 5.3 Flash has a coding score, 57.7 on the Vibe Coding Index; GPT-4.1 Nano has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick GPT-4.1 Nano for output tokens 1.3x cheaper ($0.40 vs $0.50 per million).

Shared results
49
GLM 5.3 Flash only
53
GPT-4.1 Nano only
22
Like-for-like categories
7 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
GLM 5.3 Flash 57.7 from 6 benchmarks, GPT-4.1 Nano not benchmarked.
Widest category
Math, 46.7 points apart on average over 3 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
ARC-AGI: GLM 5.3 Flash 91.0% against GPT-4.1 Nano 0.0%, 91.0 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GLM 5.3 Flash $0.50 against GPT-4.1 Nano $0.40 per million output tokens, 1.3x apart.
Context window
GLM 5.3 Flash takes 1.05M tokens, GPT-4.1 Nano 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
CategoryGLM 5.3 FlashBarsGPT-4.1 NanoTies
Coding40
Intelligence20
Reasoning110
Math30
Knowledge70
Web design60
General160
All shared boards490
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index40
Coding benchmarks for GLM 5.3 Flash and GPT-4.1 Nano
BenchmarkGLM 5.3 FlashGPT-4.1 NanoLeader
Aider polyglotNot measured8.9%Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
LiveBench coding80.6%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 Flash measured
LMArena WebDev1607Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 Flash measured
AA Coding Index71.511.1GLM 5.3 Flash
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)80.5%42.7%GLM 5.3 Flash
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)92.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 Flash measured
Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI)37.4%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 Flash measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)30.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 Flash measured
Code migration (Vals AI)20.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 Flash measured
ProgramBench (Vals AI)0.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 Flash measured
IOI (Vals AI)52.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 Flash measured
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)62.9%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 Flash measured
Vibe Code Bench 1-100 (Vals AI)16.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 Flash measured
SkillsBench (Vals AI)40.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 Flash measured
CyberBench (Vals AI)67.9%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 Flash measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured32.6%Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
SciCode51.6%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 Flash measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured3.8%Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
FrontierCode31.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 Flash measured
FrontierSWE18.1%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 Flash measured
WeirdMLNot measured19.0%Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
ALE-Bench303.6Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 Flash measured
LMArena Text: coding15071306GLM 5.3 Flash
LMArena Text: software and IT15001305GLM 5.3 Flash
LMArena WebDev: React1624Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 Flash measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML1577Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 Flash measured
LMArena WebDev: from an image1578Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 Flash measured
Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Intelligence benchmarks for GLM 5.3 Flash and GPT-4.1 Nano
BenchmarkGLM 5.3 FlashGPT-4.1 NanoLeader
AA Intelligence Index41.87.8GLM 5.3 Flash
Epoch Capabilities Index153.1129.5GLM 5.3 Flash
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index14 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for GLM 5.3 Flash and GPT-4.1 Nano
BenchmarkGLM 5.3 FlashGPT-4.1 NanoLeader
AA Agentic Index50.9Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 Flash measured
LiveBench research70.1%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 Flash measured
LiveBench browser84.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 Flash measured
LiveBench long agentic28.4%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 Flash measured
SREBench (Vals AI)0.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 Flash measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)57.9%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 Flash measured
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)31.6%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 Flash measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)45.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 Flash measured
Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark (Vals AI)10.4%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 Flash measured
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)55.9%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 Flash measured
Terminal-Bench-Science (Vals AI)2.9%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 Flash measured
τ²-Bench TelecomNot measured17.3%Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
APEX-Agents52.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 Flash measured
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL)Not measured33.1%Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
Neither model has a result on the other 27 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index110
Reasoning benchmarks for GLM 5.3 Flash and GPT-4.1 Nano
BenchmarkGLM 5.3 FlashGPT-4.1 NanoLeader
GPQA Diamond86.4%50.8%GLM 5.3 Flash
LiveBench reasoning77.6%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 Flash measured
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)86.0%55.0%GLM 5.3 Flash
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)91.2%51.2%GLM 5.3 Flash
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)39.9%3.8%GLM 5.3 Flash
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)90.2%48.9%GLM 5.3 Flash
ARC-AGI91.0%0.0%GLM 5.3 Flash
ARC-AGI-265.8%0.0%GLM 5.3 Flash
Chess puzzles21.0%0.0%GLM 5.3 Flash
Mystery game puzzles8.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 Flash measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts14901286GLM 5.3 Flash
LMArena Text: expert15111271GLM 5.3 Flash
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English14881293GLM 5.3 Flash
LMArena Vision: diagrams1317Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 Flash measured
LMArena Vision: homework1318Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 Flash measured
Kagi LLM BenchmarkNot measured33.3%Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index30
Math benchmarks for GLM 5.3 Flash and GPT-4.1 Nano
BenchmarkGLM 5.3 FlashGPT-4.1 NanoLeader
AIMENot measured26.5%Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
MATH 500 (Vals AI)Not measured80.2%Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
MGSM (Vals AI)Not measured69.3%Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
AA Math IndexNot measured24.0Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured24.0%Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
OTIS Mock AIME93.9%28.9%GLM 5.3 Flash
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 355.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 Flash measured
FrontierMath, tier 417.1%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 Flash measured
ProofBench21.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 Flash measured
MATH level 5Not measured70.0%Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
LMArena Text: math15031274GLM 5.3 Flash
LMArena Text: mathematical work14971274GLM 5.3 Flash
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index70
Knowledge benchmarks for GLM 5.3 Flash and GPT-4.1 Nano
BenchmarkGLM 5.3 FlashGPT-4.1 NanoLeader
MMLU Pro86.1%63.5%GLM 5.3 Flash
LegalBench (Vals AI)83.9%61.1%GLM 5.3 Flash
CorpFin (Vals AI)Not measured42.1%Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)75.6%60.8%GLM 5.3 Flash
MortgageTax (Vals AI)Not measured52.8%Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
MedQA (Vals AI)Not measured68.2%Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured65.7%Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
SimpleQA VerifiedNot measured6.0%Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
LMArena Text: science14841297GLM 5.3 Flash
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14751276GLM 5.3 Flash
LMArena Text: legal and government14731300GLM 5.3 Flash
LMArena Text: business and finance14601267GLM 5.3 Flash
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index60
Web design benchmarks for GLM 5.3 Flash and GPT-4.1 Nano
BenchmarkGLM 5.3 FlashGPT-4.1 NanoLeader
Design Arena: websites1272972GLM 5.3 Flash
Design Arena: UI components1316913GLM 5.3 Flash
Design Arena: game dev1278970GLM 5.3 Flash
Design Arena: data viz1262891GLM 5.3 Flash
Design Arena: 3D1316924GLM 5.3 Flash
Design Arena: all code categories1282962GLM 5.3 Flash
Design Arena: SVG1285Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 Flash measured
Design Arena: ASCII art1267Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 Flash measured
LiveBench design77.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 Flash measured
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index160
General benchmarks for GLM 5.3 Flash and GPT-4.1 Nano
BenchmarkGLM 5.3 FlashGPT-4.1 NanoLeader
Vals Index50.9%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 Flash measured
LiveBench data analysis76.4%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 Flash measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)88.9%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 Flash measured
IFBenchNot measured32.0%Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)80.0%20.3%GLM 5.3 Flash
DTBenchNot measured52.5%Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
LMCANot measured5.5%Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
Fiction.LiveBenchNot measured25.0%Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
Surface Evolver Bench52.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 Flash measured
LMArena Text14711285GLM 5.3 Flash
LMArena Text: instruction following14781266GLM 5.3 Flash
LMArena Text: creative writing14411260GLM 5.3 Flash
LMArena Vision12941063GLM 5.3 Flash
LMArena Text: English14741303GLM 5.3 Flash
LMArena Text: non-English14621260GLM 5.3 Flash
LMArena Text: Chinese15311270GLM 5.3 Flash
LMArena Text: German14621288GLM 5.3 Flash
LMArena Text: Japanese14441198GLM 5.3 Flash
LMArena Text: Korean1436Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 Flash measured
LMArena Text: French1491Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 Flash measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1475Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 Flash measured
LMArena Text: Russian14651261GLM 5.3 Flash
LMArena Text: Polish1450Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 Flash measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn14691277GLM 5.3 Flash
LMArena Text: longer queries14811283GLM 5.3 Flash
LMArena Text: writing and language14551261GLM 5.3 Flash
LMArena Text: entertainment and media14401243GLM 5.3 Flash
LMArena Vision: English12951101GLM 5.3 Flash
LMArena Vision: Chinese1363Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 Flash measured
LMArena Vision: reading text1299Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 Flash measured
LMArena Vision: humor1279Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 Flash measured
LMArena Vision: creative writing1270Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 Flash measured
Neither model has a result on the other 14 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GLM 5.3 Flash and GPT-4.1 Nano
BenchmarkGLM 5.3 FlashGPT-4.1 NanoLeader
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 Flash$0.0004Fits in one request
GPT-4.1 Nano$0.0003Fits in one request

GPT-4.1 Nano costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GLM 5.3 Flash$0.0090Fits in one request
GPT-4.1 Nano$0.0062Fits in one request

GPT-4.1 Nano costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GLM 5.3 Flash$0.035Fits in one request
GPT-4.1 Nano$0.024Fits in one request

GPT-4.1 Nano 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 GLM 5.3 Flash and GPT-4.1 Nano
SpecificationZ.ai GLM 5.3 FlashOpenAI GPT-4.1 Nano
MakerZ.aiOpenAI
WeightsOpen weightsNo public weights listed
ReleasedAugust 26, 2026April 14, 2025
Context window1.05M1.05M
Input $/Mtok$0.15$0.10
Output $/Mtok$0.50$0.40
Coding index57.7Not benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it60
Cost per solved task$0.02Not computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GLM 5.3 Flash better than GPT-4.1 Nano for coding?

Only GLM 5.3 Flash has a coding score, 57.7 on the Vibe Coding Index; GPT-4.1 Nano has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick GPT-4.1 Nano for output tokens 1.3x cheaper ($0.40 vs $0.50 per million).

Which is cheaper, GLM 5.3 Flash or GPT-4.1 Nano?

GLM 5.3 Flash costs $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.50 per million output tokens; GPT-4.1 Nano costs $0.10 and $0.40. Cost per solved task is known for GLM 5.3 Flash only.

Which has the bigger context window, GLM 5.3 Flash or GPT-4.1 Nano?

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

How many benchmarks is the GLM 5.3 Flash vs GPT-4.1 Nano comparison based on?

49 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. GLM 5.3 Flash's coding index rests on 6 independent benchmarks and GPT-4.1 Nano's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next