GLM-5.3 (Max) vs Llama 4 Scout

Which is better for the money: GLM-5.3 (Max) 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 (Max)Off the frontier

Intelligence: 44.80
Total cost: $2503

MetaLlama 4 ScoutOff the frontier

Intelligence: 6.50
Total cost: $73.6

Verdict

Depends on your budget

GLM-5.3 (Max) scores 38.3 points higher (44.8 vs 6.5) but costs 34× as much to run the benchmark ($2503 vs $73.6; flagship vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick GLM-5.3 (Max) when you need intelligence above 6.5, and Llama 4 Scout when 6.5 is enough.

Metric	GLM-5.3 (Max)	Llama 4 Scout	Difference
Intelligence (higher is better)	44.8	6.5	−85.5% Llama 4 Scout is 85.5% less intelligent
Total AA cost (lower is better)	$2,503.48	$73.56	−97.1% Llama 4 Scout is 97.1% cheaper
End-to-end time (lower is better)	31.62s	5.06s	−84.0% Llama 4 Scout is 84.0% 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 (Max): 85.5% less intelligence, 97.1% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 84.0% faster end-to-end.

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

Today's Pareto frontier

Against the frontier

GLM-5.3 (Max) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (High, Default Fallback) scores 53.60 for $2172.
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 (Max)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/llama-4-scout · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/glm-5-3/llama-4-scout?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill