Gemma 4 E4B (Reasoning) vs GLM-5.3-Flash
Which is better for the money: Gemma 4 E4B (Reasoning) by Google 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 32.9 points higher (41.8 vs 8.9) but costs 21× as much to run the benchmark ($306 vs $14.7; mid-range vs budget cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick GLM-5.3-Flash when you need intelligence above 8.9, and Gemma 4 E4B (Reasoning) when 8.9 is enough.
| Metric | Gemma 4 E4B (Reasoning) | GLM-5.3-Flash | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 8.9 | 41.8 | +369.7% GLM-5.3-Flash is 4.7× more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $14.68 | $305.52 | +1981.2% GLM-5.3-Flash is 21× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 57.75s | 39.33s | −31.9% GLM-5.3-Flash is 31.9% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.02 / $0.10 | $0.15 / $0.50 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image, Speech, Video | Text, Image |
GLM-5.3-Flash vs Gemma 4 E4B (Reasoning): 369.7% more intelligence, 1981.2% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 31.9% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Gemma 4 E4B (Reasoning) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6 Luna (Low) scores 21.50 for $10.6.
- GLM-5.3-Flash is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
Gemma 4 E4B (Reasoning)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/gemma-4-e4b/glm-5-3-flash · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gemma-4-e4b/glm-5-3-flash?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill