GLM 5.3 Flash vs Muse Wonder

Muse Wonder leads GLM 5.3 Flash on coding, 71.9 to 57.7 on the Vibe Coding Index, and GLM 5.3 Flash costs 40.0x less per output token ($0.50 vs $20.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 50 benchmarks have a result for both.

Replace GLM 5.3 Flash Replace Muse Wonder

GLM 5.3 FlashZ.ai

Coding: 57.7
Overall: 66.0
Output $/M: $0.50

Muse WonderMeta

Coding: 71.9
Overall: No data
Output $/M: $20.00

vs boards won of 50 shared

GLM 5.3 Flash or Muse Wonder: which to pick

Pick Muse Wonder for coding: it scores 71.9 on the Vibe Coding Index against 57.7 for GLM 5.3 Flash, though on 3 benchmarks against 6.

Pick GLM 5.3 Flash for output tokens 40.0x cheaper ($0.50 vs $20.00 per million) and work measured by Finance Agent (Vals AI) or LMArena Text: math, where it leads.

Model AGLM 5.3 FlashZ.ai57.7/1006 independent benchmarks$0.02 per solved task Model BMuse WonderMeta71.9/1003 independent benchmarksNo cost per solved task

505210

Shared results: 50
GLM 5.3 Flash only: 52
Muse Wonder only: 10
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.

Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
Muse Wonder
Muse Wonder scores 71.9 against 57.7.
6 and 3 benchmarks behind the scores
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
No call
Only GLM 5.3 Flash has a AA Intelligence Index result, 41.8.
Directional only
Agentic work
AA Agentic Index
No call
Only GLM 5.3 Flash has a AA Agentic Index result, 50.9.
Directional only
Reasoning
GPQA Diamond
No call
Only GLM 5.3 Flash has a GPQA Diamond result, 86.4%.
Directional only
Knowledge
MMLU Pro
No call
Only GLM 5.3 Flash has a MMLU Pro result, 86.1%.
Directional only
Web design
Design Arena: websites
Muse Wonder
Muse Wonder leads, 1362 against 1272.
Same board, both measured
General
Vals Index
Muse Wonder
Muse Wonder leads, 64.9% against 50.9%.
Same board, both measured
Long documents
Listed context window
No call
Both take 1.05M tokens.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
GLM 5.3 Flash
GLM 5.3 Flash $0.0004, Muse Wonder $0.014 per turn.
List prices
Cost per solved task
One SWE-bench Verified task, solved
No call
Only GLM 5.3 Flash has the number, $0.02.
Directional only

At a glance

Coding index: GLM 5.3 Flash 57.7 from 6 benchmarks, Muse Wonder 71.9 from 3 benchmarks.
Widest category: Math, 22.9 points apart on average over 3 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap: ProofBench: GLM 5.3 Flash 21.0% against Muse Wonder 84.0%, 63.0 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price: GLM 5.3 Flash $0.50 against Muse Wonder $20.00 per million output tokens, 40.0x 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
Category	GLM 5.3 Flash	Muse Wonder
Coding	0	12
Intelligence	0	1
Agentic work	1	5
Reasoning	0	4
Math	1	2
Knowledge	0	4
Web design	0	6
General	0	14
All shared boards	2	48

CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index012

Coding benchmarks for GLM 5.3 Flash and Muse Wonder
Benchmark	GLM 5.3 Flash	Muse Wonder	Leader
LiveBench coding	80.6%	Not measured	Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
LMArena WebDev	1607	1652	Muse Wonder
AA Coding Index	71.5	Not measured	Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)	80.5%	Not measured	Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)	92.0%	Not measured	Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI)	37.4%	49.5%	Muse Wonder
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)	30.8%	83.1%	Muse Wonder
Code migration (Vals AI)	20.5%	62.5%	Muse Wonder
ProgramBench (Vals AI)	0.0%	Not measured	Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
IOI (Vals AI)	52.5%	66.9%	Muse Wonder
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)	62.9%	Not measured	Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
SWE-bench Multimodal (Vals AI)	Not measured	45.6%	Only Muse Wonder measured
Vibe Code Bench 1-100 (Vals AI)	16.0%	26.6%	Muse Wonder
SkillsBench (Vals AI)	40.2%	Not measured	Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
CyberBench (Vals AI)	67.9%	80.4%	Muse Wonder
SciCode	51.6%	60.3%	Muse Wonder
FrontierCode	31.8%	Not measured	Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
FrontierSWE	18.1%	Not measured	Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
ALE-Bench	303.6	Not measured	Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
LMArena Text: coding	1507	1522	Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: software and IT	1500	1515	Muse Wonder
LMArena WebDev: React	1624	1641	Muse Wonder
LMArena WebDev: HTML	1577	1694	Muse Wonder
LMArena WebDev: from an image	1578	Not measured	Only 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 GLM 5.3 Flash and Muse Wonder
Benchmark	GLM 5.3 Flash	Muse Wonder	Leader
AA Intelligence Index	41.8	Not measured	Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
Epoch Capabilities Index	153.1	161.8	Muse Wonder

Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index15

Agentic work benchmarks for GLM 5.3 Flash and Muse Wonder
Benchmark	GLM 5.3 Flash	Muse Wonder	Leader
AA Agentic Index	50.9	Not measured	Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
Design Arena: spreadsheets	Not measured	1243	Only Muse Wonder measured
LiveBench research	70.1%	Not measured	Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
LiveBench browser	84.0%	Not measured	Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
LiveBench long agentic	28.4%	Not measured	Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
SREBench (Vals AI)	0.8%	Not measured	Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)	57.9%	56.6%	GLM 5.3 Flash
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)	31.6%	36.3%	Muse Wonder
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)	45.2%	50.5%	Muse Wonder
Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark (Vals AI)	10.4%	23.8%	Muse Wonder
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)	55.9%	67.1%	Muse Wonder
BioMysteryBench (Vals AI)	Not measured	67.0%	Only Muse Wonder measured
Terminal-Bench-Science (Vals AI)	2.9%	22.9%	Muse Wonder
Vals Science Index	Not measured	39.1%	Only Muse Wonder measured
CUA-bench (Vals AI)	Not measured	7.2%	Only Muse Wonder measured
APEX-Agents	52.8%	Not measured	Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
Vending-Bench 2	Not measured	$9,432	Only Muse Wonder measured
Neither model has a result on the other 24 boards here

ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04

Reasoning benchmarks for GLM 5.3 Flash and Muse Wonder
Benchmark	GLM 5.3 Flash	Muse Wonder	Leader
GPQA Diamond	86.4%	Not measured	Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
LiveBench reasoning	77.6%	Not measured	Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
MysteryMechanism (Vals AI)	Not measured	27.5%	Only Muse Wonder measured
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)	86.0%	Not measured	Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)	91.2%	Not measured	Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)	39.9%	50.1%	Muse Wonder
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)	90.2%	Not measured	Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
ARC-AGI	91.0%	Not measured	Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
ARC-AGI-2	65.8%	Not measured	Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
Chess puzzles	21.0%	Not measured	Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
Mystery game puzzles	8.0%	Not measured	Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts	1490	1506	Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: expert	1511	1513	Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English	1488	1506	Muse Wonder
LMArena Vision: diagrams	1317	Not measured	Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
LMArena Vision: homework	1318	Not measured	Only 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 index12

Math benchmarks for GLM 5.3 Flash and Muse Wonder
Benchmark	GLM 5.3 Flash	Muse Wonder	Leader
OTIS Mock AIME	93.9%	Not measured	Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3	55.8%	Not measured	Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
FrontierMath, tier 4	17.1%	Not measured	Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
ProofBench	21.0%	84.0%	Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: math	1503	1486	GLM 5.3 Flash
LMArena Text: mathematical work	1497	1514	Muse Wonder
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 GLM 5.3 Flash and Muse Wonder
Benchmark	GLM 5.3 Flash	Muse Wonder	Leader
MMLU Pro	86.1%	Not measured	Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)	83.9%	Not measured	Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)	75.6%	Not measured	Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
LMArena Text: science	1484	1506	Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare	1475	1512	Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: legal and government	1473	1505	Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: business and finance	1460	1483	Muse Wonder
Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here

Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index06

Web design benchmarks for GLM 5.3 Flash and Muse Wonder
Benchmark	GLM 5.3 Flash	Muse Wonder	Leader
Design Arena: websites	1272	1362	Muse Wonder
Design Arena: UI components	1316	1379	Muse Wonder
Design Arena: game dev	1278	1376	Muse Wonder
Design Arena: data viz	1262	1317	Muse Wonder
Design Arena: 3D	1316	1427	Muse Wonder
Design Arena: all code categories	1282	1371	Muse Wonder
Design Arena: SVG	1285	Not measured	Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
Design Arena: ASCII art	1267	Not measured	Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
LiveBench design	77.2%	Not measured	Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured

GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index014

General benchmarks for GLM 5.3 Flash and Muse Wonder
Benchmark	GLM 5.3 Flash	Muse Wonder	Leader
Vals Index	50.9%	64.9%	Muse Wonder
LiveBench data analysis	76.4%	Not measured	Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI)	Not measured	70.2%	Only Muse Wonder measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)	88.9%	Not measured	Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)	80.0%	80.7%	Muse Wonder
DTBench	Not measured	95.2%	Only Muse Wonder measured
LMCA	Not measured	56.8%	Only Muse Wonder measured
Surface Evolver Bench	52.5%	Not measured	Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
LMArena Text	1471	1502	Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: instruction following	1478	1491	Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: creative writing	1441	1491	Muse Wonder
LMArena Vision	1294	Not measured	Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
LMArena Text: English	1474	1507	Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: non-English	1462	1492	Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: Chinese	1531	1537	Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: German	1462	Not measured	Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
LMArena Text: Japanese	1444	Not measured	Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
LMArena Text: Korean	1436	Not measured	Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
LMArena Text: French	1491	1523	Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: Spanish	1475	Not measured	Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
LMArena Text: Russian	1465	1522	Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: Polish	1450	Not measured	Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn	1469	1510	Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: longer queries	1481	1493	Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: writing and language	1455	1496	Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: entertainment and media	1440	1482	Muse Wonder
LMArena Vision: English	1295	Not measured	Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
LMArena Vision: Chinese	1363	Not measured	Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
LMArena Vision: reading text	1299	Not measured	Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
LMArena Vision: humor	1279	Not measured	Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
LMArena Vision: creative writing	1270	Not measured	Only GLM 5.3 Flash measured
Neither model has a result on the other 15 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 Muse Wonder
Benchmark	GLM 5.3 Flash	Muse Wonder	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 Flash$0.0004Fits in one request

Muse Wonder$0.014Fits in one request

GLM 5.3 Flash costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GLM 5.3 Flash$0.0090Fits in one request

Muse Wonder$0.260Fits in one request

GLM 5.3 Flash costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GLM 5.3 Flash$0.035Fits in one request

Muse Wonder$1.00Fits 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 GLM 5.3 Flash and Muse Wonder
Specification	Z.ai GLM 5.3 Flash	Meta Muse Wonder
Maker	Z.ai	Meta
Weights	Open weights	No public weights listed
Released	August 26, 2026	October 12, 2026
Context window	1.05M	1.05M
Input $/Mtok	$0.15	$4.00
Output $/Mtok	$0.50	$20.00
Coding index	57.7	71.9
Independent measurements behind it	6	3
Cost per solved task	$0.02	Not computable
Source	OpenRouter listing	OpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GLM 5.3 Flash better than Muse Wonder for coding?

Pick Muse Wonder for coding: it scores 71.9 on the Vibe Coding Index against 57.7 for GLM 5.3 Flash, though on 3 benchmarks against 6. Pick GLM 5.3 Flash for output tokens 40.0x cheaper ($0.50 vs $20.00 per million) and work measured by Finance Agent (Vals AI) or LMArena Text: math, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, GLM 5.3 Flash or Muse Wonder?

GLM 5.3 Flash costs $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.50 per million output tokens; Muse Wonder costs $4.00 and $20.00. Cost per solved task is known for GLM 5.3 Flash only.

Which has the bigger context window, GLM 5.3 Flash or Muse Wonder?

Neither: both take 1.05M tokens.

How many benchmarks is the GLM 5.3 Flash vs Muse Wonder comparison based on?

50 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 Muse Wonder's on 3. 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/glm-5-3-flash-vs-meta-muse-wonder" title="GLM 5.3 Flash vs Muse Wonder, 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/glm-5-3-flash-vs-meta-muse-wonder">LLMBenchmark.ai, GLM 5.3 Flash vs Muse Wonder</a></p>

GLM 5.3 Flash or Muse Wonder: which to pick

Which one for your work

Coding

Intelligence

Agentic work

Reasoning

Knowledge

Web design

General

Long documents

Everyday cost

Cost per solved task

At a glance

Benchmark by benchmark

What each workload costs

Chat turn

Repository review

Agent loop

Specification differences

Questions

Compare next