Celeris-1 vs GLM-5.3-Flash
Which is better for the money: Celeris-1 by Celeris or GLM-5.3-Flash by Z AI? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-24.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
GLM-5.3-Flash scores 35.5 points higher (41.8 vs 6.3) but costs 5.1× as much to run the benchmark ($306 vs $60.0; both mid-range class). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick GLM-5.3-Flash when you need intelligence above 6.3, and Celeris-1 when 6.3 is enough.
| Metric | Celeris-1 | GLM-5.3-Flash | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 6.3 | 41.8 | +563.5% GLM-5.3-Flash is 6.6× more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $59.99 | $305.52 | +409.3% GLM-5.3-Flash is 5.1× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 0.87s | 39.33s | +4420.7% GLM-5.3-Flash is 4420.7% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.20 / $0.70 | $0.15 / $0.50 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
GLM-5.3-Flash vs Celeris-1: 563.5% more intelligence, 409.3% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 4420.7% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Celeris-1 is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Haiku 5.5 (Medium) scores 34.50 for $56.4.
- GLM-5.3-Flash is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
Celeris-1GLM-5.3-FlashToday's Pareto frontierOpen-weights frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/celeris-1/glm-5-3-flash · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/celeris-1/glm-5-3-flash?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill