GLM-5.3-Flash vs Granite 4.2 30B
Which is better for the money: GLM-5.3-Flash by Z AI or Granite 4.2 30B by IBM? 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 29.1 points higher (41.8 vs 12.7) but costs 2.8× as much to run the benchmark ($306 vs $111; both mid-range class). Pick GLM-5.3-Flash when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Granite 4.2 30B.
| Metric | GLM-5.3-Flash | Granite 4.2 30B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 41.8 | 12.7 | −69.6% Granite 4.2 30B is 69.6% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $305.52 | $110.83 | −63.7% Granite 4.2 30B is 63.7% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 39.33s | 36.08s | −8.3% Granite 4.2 30B is 8.3% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.15 / $0.50 | $0.16 / $0.65 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
Granite 4.2 30B vs GLM-5.3-Flash: 69.6% less intelligence, 63.7% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 8.3% faster end-to-end.
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.
- Granite 4.2 30B is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Flash scores 37.90 for $110.
GLM-5.3-FlashGranite 4.2 30BToday'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/granite-4-2-30b · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/glm-5-3-flash/granite-4-2-30b?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill