Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GLM 5.3 vs Mistral Small 4

Updated October 21, 2026. 11 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.

GLM 5.3Z.ai
Coding
70.6
Overall
44.8
Output $/M
$4.40
11
Mistral Small 4Mistral AI
Coding
No data
Overall
11.3
Output $/M
$0.60
0
vs boards won of 11 shared

Decision reading

Only GLM 5.3 has a coding score, 70.6 on the Vibe Coding Index; Mistral Small 4 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Mistral Small 4 has the edge where output tokens cost 7.3x less.

Shared results
11
GLM 5.3 only
89
Mistral Small 4 only
3
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.

At a glance

Coding index
GLM 5.3 70.6 from 6 benchmarks, Mistral Small 4 not benchmarked.
Widest category
Agentic work, 52.3 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI): GLM 5.3 78.1% against Mistral Small 4 0.0%, 78.1 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GLM 5.3 $4.40 against Mistral Small 4 $0.60 per million output tokens, 7.3x apart.
Context window
GLM 5.3 takes 1.05M tokens, Mistral Small 4 262K.

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 5.3BarsMistral Small 4Ties
Coding40
Intelligence10
Agentic work10
Reasoning20
General30
All shared boards110
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index40
Coding benchmarks for GLM 5.3 and Mistral Small 4
BenchmarkGLM 5.3Mistral Small 4Leader
LiveBench coding82.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena WebDev1621Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
AA Coding Index74.826.6GLM 5.3
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%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)78.1%0.0%GLM 5.3
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%38.8%GLM 5.3
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured17.4%Only Mistral Small 4 measured
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-Bench1317.4497.6GLM 5.3
LMArena Text: coding1497Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1493Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena WebDev: React1641Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML1595Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 14 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for GLM 5.3 and Mistral Small 4
BenchmarkGLM 5.3Mistral Small 4Leader
AA Intelligence Index44.811.3GLM 5.3
Epoch Capabilities Index156.0Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Agentic work benchmarks for GLM 5.3 and Mistral Small 4
BenchmarkGLM 5.3Mistral Small 4Leader
AA Agentic Index53.10.8GLM 5.3
Design Arena: agents building mobile apps1194Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Design Arena: HTML slides1189Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Design Arena: PowerPoint slides1255Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LiveBench research73.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LiveBench browser0.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LiveBench long agentic35.9%Not 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)39.7%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)49.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark (Vals AI)14.6%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
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
τ²-Bench TelecomNot measured41.2%Only Mistral Small 4 measured
APEX-Agents56.6%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Vending-Bench 2$8,164Not measuredOnly 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 index20
Reasoning benchmarks for GLM 5.3 and Mistral Small 4
BenchmarkGLM 5.3Mistral Small 4Leader
GPQA Diamond88.1%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LiveBench reasoning85.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
MysteryMechanism (Vals AI)23.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)91.7%76.9%GLM 5.3
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)42.3%9.9%GLM 5.3
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)90.9%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 prompts1490Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: expert1514Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English1496Not measuredOnly 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 index6 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for GLM 5.3 and Mistral Small 4
BenchmarkGLM 5.3Mistral Small 4Leader
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: math1495Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work1497Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index9 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for GLM 5.3 and Mistral Small 4
BenchmarkGLM 5.3Mistral Small 4Leader
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
SimpleQA Verified41.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: science1498Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare1481Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: legal and government1473Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: business and finance1459Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index9 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for GLM 5.3 and Mistral Small 4
BenchmarkGLM 5.3Mistral Small 4Leader
Design Arena: websites1295Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Design Arena: UI components1314Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Design Arena: game dev1311Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Design Arena: data viz1259Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Design Arena: 3D1332Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Design Arena: all code categories1304Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Design Arena: SVG1293Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Design Arena: ASCII art1213Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LiveBench design77.3%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index30
General benchmarks for GLM 5.3 and Mistral Small 4
BenchmarkGLM 5.3Mistral Small 4Leader
Vals Index59.7%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LiveBench data analysis70.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI)68.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)88.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
IFBenchNot measured48.2%Only Mistral Small 4 measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)79.7%49.7%GLM 5.3
DTBench87.7%70.9%GLM 5.3
LMCA55.5%20.6%GLM 5.3
LMArena Text1474Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: instruction following1479Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: creative writing1458Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: English1482Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: non-English1459Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: Chinese1532Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: German1488Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: Japanese1460Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: Korean1460Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: French1503Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1462Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: Russian1469Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: Polish1466Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn1472Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: longer queries1483Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: writing and language1469Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media1447Not measuredOnly 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
Image generation benchmarks for GLM 5.3 and Mistral Small 4
BenchmarkGLM 5.3Mistral Small 4Leader
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
Mistral Small 4$0.0004Fits in one request

Mistral Small 4 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GLM 5.3$0.083Fits in one request
Mistral Small 4$0.0093Fits in one request

Mistral Small 4 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GLM 5.3$0.324Fits in one request
Mistral Small 4$0.036Fits in one request

Mistral Small 4 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 Mistral Small 4
SpecificationZ.ai GLM 5.3Mistral Small 4
MakerZ.aiMistral AI
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedAugust 18, 2026March 16, 2026
Context window1.05M262K
Input $/Mtok$1.40$0.15
Output $/Mtok$4.40$0.60
Coding index70.6Not benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it61
Cost per solved task$0.36Not computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GLM 5.3 better than Mistral Small 4 for coding?

Only GLM 5.3 has a coding score, 70.6 on the Vibe Coding Index; Mistral Small 4 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Mistral Small 4 has the edge where output tokens cost 7.3x less.

Which is cheaper, GLM 5.3 or Mistral Small 4?

GLM 5.3 costs $1.40 per million input tokens and $4.40 per million output tokens; Mistral Small 4 costs $0.15 and $0.60. Cost per solved task is known for GLM 5.3 only.

Which has the bigger context window, GLM 5.3 or Mistral Small 4?

GLM 5.3, with 1.05M tokens against 262K.

How many benchmarks is the GLM 5.3 vs Mistral Small 4 comparison based on?

11 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. GLM 5.3's coding index rests on 6 independent benchmarks and Mistral Small 4's on 1. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next