DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max) vs GLM-5.3-Flash
Which is better for the money: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max) by DeepSeek or GLM-5.3-Flash by Z AI? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-25.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max) scores 3.3 points higher (45.1 vs 41.8) but costs 1.5× as much to run the benchmark ($445 vs $306; both mid-range class). Pick DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max) when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise GLM-5.3-Flash.
| Metric | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max) | GLM-5.3-Flash | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 45.1 | 41.8 | −7.3% GLM-5.3-Flash is 7.3% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $444.60 | $305.52 | −31.3% GLM-5.3-Flash is 31.3% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 16.22s | 38.43s | +136.9% GLM-5.3-Flash is 136.9% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.30 / $1.20 | $0.15 / $0.50 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
GLM-5.3-Flash vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max): 7.3% less intelligence, 31.3% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 136.9% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Medium) scores 47.80 for $361.
- GLM-5.3-Flash is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max)GLM-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/deepseek-v4-1-flash-1017/glm-5-3-flash · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/deepseek-v4-1-flash-1017/glm-5-3-flash?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill