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 2026-09-09.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
GLM-5.3-Flash scores 35.6 points higher (41.9 vs 6.3) but costs 4.7× as much to run the benchmark ($280 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 | 41.9 | +565.1% GLM-5.3-Flash is 6.7× more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $59.99 | $280.28 | +367.2% GLM-5.3-Flash is 4.7× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 0.97s | 39.52s | +3974.2% GLM-5.3-Flash is 3974.2% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.20 / $0.70 | $0.15 / $0.50 | |
| Input modalities | Not reported | Not reported |
GLM-5.3-Flash vs Celeris-1: 565.1% more intelligence, 367.2% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 3974.2% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Celeris-1 is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.5 scores 22.30 for $42.6.
- GLM-5.3-Flash is on today's frontier: nothing is both smarter and cheaper.
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