GLM-5.3 (Low) vs Llama 4 Scout

Which is better for the money: GLM-5.3 (Low) by Z AI or Llama 4 Scout by Meta? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-25.

Trade-off

Z AIGLM-5.3 (Low)Off the frontier

Intelligence: 34.30
Total cost: $1013

MetaLlama 4 ScoutOff the frontier

Intelligence: 6.50
Total cost: $73.6

Verdict

Depends on your budget

GLM-5.3 (Low) scores 27.8 points higher (34.3 vs 6.5) but costs 14× as much to run the benchmark ($1013 vs $73.6; premium vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick GLM-5.3 (Low) when you need intelligence above 6.5, and Llama 4 Scout when 6.5 is enough.

Metric	GLM-5.3 (Low)	Llama 4 Scout	Difference
Intelligence (higher is better)	34.3	6.5	−81.0% Llama 4 Scout is 81.0% less intelligent
Total AA cost (lower is better)	$1,012.50	$73.56	−92.7% Llama 4 Scout is 92.7% cheaper
End-to-end time (lower is better)	31.40s	4.99s	−84.1% Llama 4 Scout is 84.1% faster
Price per 1M tokens (in / out)	$1.40 / $4.40	$0.18 / $0.66
Input modalities	Text	Text, Image

Llama 4 Scout vs GLM-5.3 (Low): 81.0% less intelligence, 92.7% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 84.1% faster end-to-end.

Open this matchup in the interactive picker GLM-5.3 (Low): what beats it Llama 4 Scout: what beats it

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.
Llama 4 Scout is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6 Luna (Xhigh) scores 34.60 for $66.8.

GLM-5.3 (Low)Llama 4 ScoutToday'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/llama-4-scout · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/glm-5-3-low/llama-4-scout?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill