GLM-5.3-Flash vs GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh)
Which is better for the money: GLM-5.3-Flash by Z AI or GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) by OpenAI? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-24.
Clear winner
Verdict
Pick GLM-5.3-Flash
GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) vs GLM-5.3-Flash: 50.5% less intelligence, 8.4% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 35.5% slower end-to-end.
| Metric | GLM-5.3-Flash | GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 41.8 | 20.7 | −50.5% GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) is 50.5% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $305.52 | $331.24 | +8.4% GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) is 8.4% more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 39.33s | 53.29s | +35.5% GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) is 35.5% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.15 / $0.50 | $0.20 / $1.25 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- GLM-5.3-Flash is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
- GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
GLM-5.3-FlashGPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh)Today'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/glm-5-3-flash/gpt-5-4-nano · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/glm-5-3-flash/gpt-5-4-nano?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill