GLM-5.3-Flash vs LongCat 2.0
Which is better for the money: GLM-5.3-Flash by Z AI or LongCat 2.0 by LongCat? 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
LongCat 2.0 vs GLM-5.3-Flash: 54.3% less intelligence, 78.3% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 9.6% faster end-to-end.
| Metric | GLM-5.3-Flash | LongCat 2.0 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 41.8 | 19.1 | −54.3% LongCat 2.0 is 54.3% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $305.52 | $544.74 | +78.3% LongCat 2.0 is 78.3% more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 39.33s | 35.54s | −9.6% LongCat 2.0 is 9.6% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.15 / $0.50 | $0.75 / $2.95 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
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.
- LongCat 2.0 is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (High) scores 50.20 for $521.
GLM-5.3-FlashLongCat 2.0Today'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/longcat-2-0 · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/glm-5-3-flash/longcat-2-0?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill