AI Trend Notifier
EN

$ diff glm-5-3-flash claude-opus-5

GLM-5.3-Flash vs Claude Opus 5

Values come from GLM-5.3-Flash and Claude Opus 5, where each is cited to its source. This page states no benchmark result and ranks neither model — it puts two published specifications next to each other. Where a lab has not published a figure, the row says so rather than guessing.

What actually differs

Context window
GLM-5.3-Flash takes 1.0M against 1M — modestly more room in a single request.
Input price
GLM-5.3-Flash at $0.15/M against $5/M — 33.3× cheaper to feed. Standard rates: one of these labs also quotes a lower cached-input tier, which applies only when a prefix is reused — see the full spec below.
Output price
GLM-5.3-Flash at $0.5/M against $25/M — 50.0× cheaper to generate. Output dominates the bill on most agentic workloads, where the model writes far more than it reads.
Weights
GLM-5.3-Flash publishes weights (MIT); Claude Opus 5 is API-only. That decides self-hosting, air-gapped deployment and fine-tuning before any capability question does.
Recency
GLM-5.3-Flash shipped 33 days after Claude Opus 5 (2026-08-26 vs 2026-07-24).

Full spec

AttributeGLM-5.3-FlashClaude Opus 5
DeveloperZ.aiAnthropic
Released2026-08-262026-07-24
Context window1,048,576 (1M)1M tokens
Pricing$0.15/M input · $0.03/M cached input · $0.50/M output$5/M input · $25/M output (standard); $10/M · $50/M (Fast mode, research preview)
LicenseMITproprietary
AvailabilityHugging Face (open weights), Z.ai APIClaude.ai, API (`claude-opus-5`), Bedrock (`anthropic.claude-opus-53`), Vertex AI, Microsoft Foundry, Claude Code, Cowork

How these pages are produced

← all comparisons