LLMBenchmark.ai

Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GLM 5.3 vs Hy4 preview

Updated October 21, 2026. 23 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
73.1
Overall
44.8
Output $/M
$1.40
15
Hy4 previewTencent
Coding
61.6
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$2.501
8
vs boards won of 23 shared

Decision reading

Pick GLM 5.3 for coding: it scores 73.1 on the Vibe Coding Index against 61.6 for Hy4 preview.

Pick Hy4 preview when what matters is LMArena WebDev or Code migration (Vals AI), where it leads.

Shared results
23
GLM 5.3 only
77
Hy4 preview only
1
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 73.1 from 2 benchmarks, Hy4 preview 61.6 from 1 benchmark.
Widest category
Math, 26.0 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI): GLM 5.3 38.9% against Hy4 preview 8.1%, 30.8 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GLM 5.3 $1.40 against Hy4 preview $2.501 per million output tokens, 1.8x 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 5.3BarsHy4 previewTies
Coding64
Agentic work61
Math01
Knowledge11
General21
All shared boards158
CodingLike-for-likeFour of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index64
Coding benchmarks for GLM 5.3 and Hy4 preview
BenchmarkGLM 5.3Hy4 previewLeader
LiveBench coding82.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena WebDev16211631Hy4 preview
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%8.1%GLM 5.3
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)78.1%77.5%GLM 5.3
Code migration (Vals AI)44.2%47.4%Hy4 preview
ProgramBench (Vals AI)1.5%0.0%GLM 5.3
IOI (Vals AI)68.4%59.3%GLM 5.3
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)71.5%55.1%GLM 5.3
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%65.4%GLM 5.3
SciCode59.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 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-Bench1317.4Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: coding1497Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1493Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMArena WebDev: React16411653Hy4 preview
LMArena WebDev: HTML15951620Hy4 preview
Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
Intelligence benchmarks for GLM 5.3 and Hy4 preview
BenchmarkGLM 5.3Hy4 previewLeader
AA Intelligence Index44.8Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Epoch Capabilities Index156.0Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index61
Agentic work benchmarks for GLM 5.3 and Hy4 preview
BenchmarkGLM 5.3Hy4 previewLeader
AA Agentic Index53.1Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
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%2.3%GLM 5.3
Finance Agent (Vals AI)55.8%55.1%GLM 5.3
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)39.7%32.6%GLM 5.3
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)49.0%45.2%GLM 5.3
Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark (Vals AI)14.6%8.8%GLM 5.3
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)56.3%58.1%Hy4 preview
BioMysteryBench (Vals AI)Not measured69.3%Only Hy4 preview measured
Terminal-Bench-Science (Vals AI)5.7%1.4%GLM 5.3
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
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index11 boards, none shared
Reasoning benchmarks for GLM 5.3 and Hy4 preview
BenchmarkGLM 5.3Hy4 previewLeader
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%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)42.3%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
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
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Math benchmarks for GLM 5.3 and Hy4 preview
BenchmarkGLM 5.3Hy4 previewLeader
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%75.0%Hy4 preview
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
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index11
Knowledge benchmarks for GLM 5.3 and Hy4 preview
BenchmarkGLM 5.3Hy4 previewLeader
MMLU Pro86.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)84.8%83.8%GLM 5.3
TaxEval (Vals AI)72.4%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
MedCode (Vals AI)42.9%43.3%Hy4 preview
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 Hy4 preview
BenchmarkGLM 5.3Hy4 previewLeader
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 viz1260Not 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: SVG1292Not 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 index21
General benchmarks for GLM 5.3 and Hy4 preview
BenchmarkGLM 5.3Hy4 previewLeader
Vals Index59.7%53.2%GLM 5.3
LiveBench data analysis70.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI)68.5%68.6%Hy4 preview
MedScribe (Vals AI)88.8%83.6%GLM 5.3
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)79.7%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
DTBench87.7%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
LMCA55.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.3 measured
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 22 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 Hy4 preview
BenchmarkGLM 5.3Hy4 previewLeader
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$0.0008Fits in one request
Hy4 preview$0.0021Fits in one request

GLM 5.3 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GLM 5.3$0.0081Fits in one request
Hy4 preview$0.049Fits in one request

GLM 5.3 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GLM 5.3$0.030Fits in one request
Hy4 preview$0.192Fits in one request

GLM 5.3 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 Hy4 preview
SpecificationZ.ai GLM 5.3Tencent Hy4 preview
MakerZ.aiTencent
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedAugust 18, 2026August 28, 2026
Context window1.05M1.05M
Input $/Mtok$0.079$0.834
Output $/Mtok$1.40$2.501
Coding index73.161.6
Independent measurements behind it21
Cost per solved task$0.36Not computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GLM 5.3 better than Hy4 preview for coding?

Pick GLM 5.3 for coding: it scores 73.1 on the Vibe Coding Index against 61.6 for Hy4 preview. Pick Hy4 preview when what matters is LMArena WebDev or Code migration (Vals AI), where it leads.

Which is cheaper, GLM 5.3 or Hy4 preview?

GLM 5.3 costs $0.079 per million input tokens and $1.40 per million output tokens; Hy4 preview costs $0.834 and $2.501. Cost per solved task is known for GLM 5.3 only.

Which has the bigger context window, GLM 5.3 or Hy4 preview?

Neither: both take 1.05M tokens.

How many benchmarks is the GLM 5.3 vs Hy4 preview comparison based on?

23 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. GLM 5.3's coding index rests on 2 independent benchmarks and Hy4 preview's on 1. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next