GLM-5.3 (Low) vs GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh)
Which is better for the money: GLM-5.3 (Low) 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.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
GLM-5.3 (Low) scores 13.6 points higher (34.3 vs 20.7) but costs 3.1× as much to run the benchmark ($1013 vs $331; premium vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick GLM-5.3 (Low) when you need intelligence above 20.7, and GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) when 20.7 is enough.
| Metric | GLM-5.3 (Low) | GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 34.3 | 20.7 | −39.7% GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) is 39.7% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $1,012.50 | $331.24 | −67.3% GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) is 67.3% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 31.21s | 53.29s | +70.7% GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) is 70.7% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $1.40 / $4.40 | $0.20 / $1.25 | |
| Input modalities | Text | Text, Image |
GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) vs GLM-5.3 (Low): 39.7% less intelligence, 67.3% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 70.7% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- GLM-5.3 (Low) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Xhigh) scores 51.00 for $662.
- 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 (Low)GPT-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-low/gpt-5-4-nano · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/glm-5-3-low/gpt-5-4-nano?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill