Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GLM 5.3 vs Muse Ember

GLM 5.3 leads Muse Ember on coding, 68.5 to 64.9 on the Vibe Coding Index, and Muse Ember costs 8.8x less per output token ($0.50 vs $4.40 per million). Updated November 14, 2026; 15 benchmarks have a result for both.

GLM 5.3Z.ai
Coding
68.5
Overall
67.0
Output $/M
$4.40
4
Muse EmberMeta
Coding
64.9
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.50
10
vs boards won of 15 shared, 1 tied

GLM 5.3 or Muse Ember: which to pick

Pick GLM 5.3 for coding: it scores 68.5 on the Vibe Coding Index against 64.9 for Muse Ember.

Pick Muse Ember for output tokens 8.8x cheaper ($0.50 vs $4.40 per million) and work measured by Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI) or Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI), where it leads.

Shared results
15
GLM 5.3 only
94
Muse Ember only
0
Like-for-like categories
5 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 68.5 from 5 benchmarks, Muse Ember 64.9 from 3 benchmarks.
Widest category
Reasoning, 6.4 points apart on average over 2 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark (Vals AI): GLM 5.3 14.6% against Muse Ember 25.0%, 10.4 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GLM 5.3 $4.40 against Muse Ember $0.50 per million output tokens, 8.8x 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
CategoryGLM 5.3BarsMuse EmberTies
Coding34
Agentic work121 tie
Reasoning02
Knowledge01
General01
All shared boards4101 tie
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index34
Coding benchmarks for GLM 5.3 and Muse Ember
BenchmarkGLM 5.3Muse EmberLeader
LMArena WebDev16221609GLM 5.3
AA Coding Index74.8Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)80.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)95.4%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI)38.9%39.4%Muse Ember
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)78.1%83.7%Muse Ember
Code migration (Vals AI)44.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
ProgramBench (Vals AI)1.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
IOI (Vals AI)68.4%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)71.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Vibe Code Bench 1-100 (Vals AI)20.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
SkillsBench (Vals AI)47.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
CyberBench (Vals AI)72.1%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
SciCode59.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Terminal-Bench 4.0 (Artificial Analysis run)41.9%40.9%GLM 5.3
FrontierCode 2.021.6%27.2%Muse Ember
FrontierCode40.1%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
FrontierSWE30.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
WeirdML75.4%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
ALE-Bench1317.4Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: coding1499Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1495Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena WebDev: React16421616GLM 5.3
LMArena WebDev: HTML15961621Muse Ember
SWE-Bench Pro V295.6%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
GameBench 272.3Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Terminal-Bench 3.032.4%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Terminal-Bench 4.041.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
CursorBench 4.042.6%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 23 boards here
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
Intelligence benchmarks for GLM 5.3 and Muse Ember
BenchmarkGLM 5.3Muse EmberLeader
AA Intelligence Index31.7Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Epoch Capabilities Index157.1Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index12
Agentic work benchmarks for GLM 5.3 and Muse Ember
BenchmarkGLM 5.3Muse EmberLeader
AA Agentic Index53.1Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Design Arena: agents building web apps1270Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile apps1184Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Design Arena: HTML slides1189Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Design Arena: PowerPoint slides1217Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
SREBench (Vals AI)9.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)55.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)43.3%38.2%GLM 5.3
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)49.0%49.0%Tie
Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark (Vals AI)14.6%25.0%Muse Ember
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)56.3%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Terminal-Bench-Science (Vals AI)5.7%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
APEX-Agents56.6%64.3%Muse Ember
PostTrainBench34.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Vending-Bench 2$8,164Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
MCP Atlas84.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 28 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Reasoning benchmarks for GLM 5.3 and Muse Ember
BenchmarkGLM 5.3Muse EmberLeader
GPQA Diamond88.1%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
MysteryMechanism (Vals AI)23.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)91.7%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)42.3%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
HLE-Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)17.9%25.1%Muse Ember
CritPt v2, hard subset (Artificial Analysis run)33.5%39.0%Muse Ember
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)90.9%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
SimpleBench66.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Chess puzzles37.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Mystery game puzzles33.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts1493Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: expert1519Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English1500Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Scale run)16.4%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for GLM 5.3 and Muse Ember
BenchmarkGLM 5.3Muse EmberLeader
OTIS Mock AIME91.1%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 368.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
FrontierMath, tier 429.3%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
ProofBench49.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: math1500Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work1502Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Knowledge benchmarks for GLM 5.3 and Muse Ember
BenchmarkGLM 5.3Muse EmberLeader
MMLU Pro86.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)84.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)72.4%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
MedCode (Vals AI)42.9%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
AA-Omniscience6.07.7Muse Ember
SimpleQA Verified41.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: science1499Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare1483Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: legal and government1481Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: business and finance1461Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for GLM 5.3 and Muse Ember
BenchmarkGLM 5.3Muse EmberLeader
Design Arena: websites1279Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Design Arena: UI components1284Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Design Arena: game dev1289Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Design Arena: data viz1251Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Design Arena: 3D1295Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Design Arena: all code categories1284Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Design Arena: SVG1246Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Design Arena: ASCII art1208Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
General benchmarks for GLM 5.3 and Muse Ember
BenchmarkGLM 5.3Muse EmberLeader
Vals Index59.9%60.5%Muse Ember
Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI)68.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)88.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)79.7%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
GDPval-AA1655Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
DTBench87.7%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMCA55.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text1475Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: instruction following1483Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: creative writing1459Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: English1483Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: non-English1462Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: Chinese1535Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: German1497Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: Japanese1470Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: Korean1440Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: French1498Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1467Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: Russian1472Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: Polish1463Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn1474Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: longer queries1486Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: writing and language1468Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media1447Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 25 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GLM 5.3 and Muse Ember
BenchmarkGLM 5.3Muse EmberLeader
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$0.0036Fits in one request
Muse Ember$0.0003Fits in one request

Muse Ember costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GLM 5.3$0.083Fits in one request
Muse Ember$0.0065Fits in one request

Muse Ember costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GLM 5.3$0.324Fits in one request
Muse Ember$0.025Fits in one request

Muse Ember 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 and Muse Ember
SpecificationZ.ai GLM 5.3Meta Muse Ember
MakerZ.aiMeta
WeightsOpen weightsNo public weights listed
ReleasedAugust 18, 2026November 9, 2026
Context window1.05M1.05M
Input $/Mtok$1.40$0.10
Output $/Mtok$4.40$0.50
Coding index68.564.9
Independent measurements behind it53
Cost per solved task$0.36Not computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GLM 5.3 better than Muse Ember for coding?

Pick GLM 5.3 for coding: it scores 68.5 on the Vibe Coding Index against 64.9 for Muse Ember. Pick Muse Ember for output tokens 8.8x cheaper ($0.50 vs $4.40 per million) and work measured by Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI) or Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI), where it leads.

Which is cheaper, GLM 5.3 or Muse Ember?

GLM 5.3 costs $1.40 per million input tokens and $4.40 per million output tokens; Muse Ember costs $0.10 and $0.50. Cost per solved task is known for GLM 5.3 only.

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

Neither: both take 1.05M tokens.

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

15 benchmarks have a result for both models as of November 14, 2026. GLM 5.3's coding index rests on 5 independent benchmarks and Muse Ember'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-vs-meta-muse-ember" title="GLM 5.3 vs Muse Ember, 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-vs-meta-muse-ember">LLMBenchmark.ai, GLM 5.3 vs Muse Ember</a></p>