GLM-5.3-Flash vs Grok 4.6 (High)
Which is better for the money: GLM-5.3-Flash by Z AI or Grok 4.6 (High) by SpaceXAI? 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
Grok 4.6 (High) scores 2.5 points higher (44.3 vs 41.8) but costs 6.4× as much to run the benchmark ($1963 vs $306; premium vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Grok 4.6 (High) when you need intelligence above 41.8, and GLM-5.3-Flash when 41.8 is enough.
| Metric | GLM-5.3-Flash | Grok 4.6 (High) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 41.8 | 44.3 | +6.0% Grok 4.6 (High) is 6.0% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $305.52 | $1,962.90 | +542.5% Grok 4.6 (High) is 6.4× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 39.33s | 31.72s | −19.3% Grok 4.6 (High) is 19.3% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.15 / $0.50 | $2.00 / $6.00 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
Grok 4.6 (High) vs GLM-5.3-Flash: 6.0% more intelligence, 542.5% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 19.3% 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.
- Grok 4.6 (High) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Max) scores 51.80 for $1082.
GLM-5.3-FlashGrok 4.6 (High)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/grok-4-6 · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/glm-5-3-flash/grok-4-6?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill