logoalt Hacker News

GLM-5.3 is now open-weight

630 pointsby jeudespritsyesterday at 3:20 PM218 commentsview on HN

https://twitter.com/Zai_org/status/2093354097122455713

https://z.ai/blog/glm-5.3


Comments

revolvingthrowyesterday at 3:53 PM

GLM 5.3 is probably the sweet spot open weights model if you want to go beyond deepseek flash or the new glm flash. I used it with pi and had a fairly good time, especially since it’s less touchy about cyber and whatnot than the US guys. It’s slightly behind Kimi in ability but it’s a lot easier to run it, I’d expect prices (and speed!) from third parties to be noticeably better.

Assuming you’re willing to drop a fat stack of cash on the upcoming Mac m5 ultra with 512 gb unified memory, you can even run it locally, quantized to 4 bit. Whether it’s even slightly reasonable, well, my wife would probably skin me alive but maybe yours is more understanding.

show 9 replies
nkmnzyesterday at 4:09 PM

I'd like to ask Sam Altman if he still thinks that it's too dangerous to publish GPT-3. I mean, no one would use it, but what is his reasoning for not publishing it now, in 2026?

show 8 replies
mmastracyesterday at 4:17 PM

I previously posted that DS4Flash was _good_ but not _great_ on two DGX Sparks, but I have to say that GLM-5.3 is pretty amazing. It's been able to tackle all the random hard problems I've thrown at it and it has the intuition that DS4Flash seems to lack.

We're nowhere near a Fable-class model IMO, but things are going to get interesting in this next year.

show 6 replies
armcatyesterday at 8:30 PM

What's very promising here is the number of tokens-vs-accuracy ratio. I am assuming their "output tokens" means tokens generated as part of thinking and any tool calls (what are referred to as "input tokens" from billing PoV by service providers). The Chinese models like Qwen3.8 and GLM 5.2 are insanely overthinking in our workloads (which are highly complex data analysis tasks). It's a factor of 3-4x over Opus and GPT models. Even with cheaper prices per 1M tokens, the cost ends up being higher, in some cases 2x. So this is very promising from GLM 5.3. Looking forward to trying it.

scosmanyesterday at 3:40 PM

I've been using it more and more. Feels like Opus 4.8, in the best possible way.

show 6 replies
frayesterday at 3:50 PM

h/t to DeepInfra for being the first 3rd party provider for it on OpenRouter (https://openrouter.ai/z-ai/glm-5.3?endpoint=b711bea7-3994-49...).

show 5 replies
redox99yesterday at 7:28 PM

I find GLM 5.3 Flash more interesting than 5.3. The fact 5.3 does not have vision is kind of a deal breaker. Also 5.3 Flash seems to be better at making pretty UIs.

kixiQuyesterday at 5:39 PM

Does this mean it'll be on Bedrock soon? I hear great things about this model but I want AWS data handling practices...

show 2 replies
pal9000iyesterday at 3:56 PM

how feasible is it build a SOTA specialized model for some use case e.g. deal sourcing by using this as pre-trained model or a LORA or similar pattern on top? Gonna shoot my shot at a billion dollar business

show 2 replies
jamesforestwesttoday at 12:04 AM

Interesting model. It's nice to see open-weight models catching up with the top proprietary ones. The coding benchmark results are pretty impressive. Overall, it's great to see progress moving forward. Curious to see how it performs in real-world usage.

hkalbasiyesterday at 4:23 PM

Is it possible to fine tune this model and unlock / extend its cybersecurity capabilities? I'm scared that maybe we are not ready for an open-weight model with high cybersecurity skills.

show 5 replies
barrenkoyesterday at 4:56 PM

A stake through Amodei's heart.

show 1 reply
ylliuyesterday at 8:27 PM

These open weight models are catching up pretty quickly recent, I guess that's a nice thing for us

onesandofgrainyesterday at 7:59 PM

Man, imagine if we didn't have China.

anam0012today at 1:20 AM

Been using it, works wonders. I think generally the models are good enough now that with enough eval harness we can do a lot of automations.

m00dyyesterday at 3:45 PM

GLM-5.3-Flash is actually cheaper than deepseek and better than deepseek but no one is talking about yet :)

show 5 replies
rew0rkyesterday at 5:19 PM

Looking at HF, it looks like the unquantized version is half the size of glm-5.2 756 GB vs 1.51 TB. I wonder how they were able to optimize it this well

show 2 replies
0xbadcafebeeyesterday at 7:14 PM

Stealth Ox-Alpha was GLM-5.3-Flash, and Ox-Alpha was a strong coder (way better than DS4Flash). With both GLM 5.3 and GLM 5.3 Flash, I don't think I'll need any better coding models. The main thing I need now is faster, not better.

show 1 reply
chillfoxyesterday at 4:10 PM

Seeing the price, I am probably just going to keep using GLM-5.2 until 5.3 gets cheaper.

show 1 reply
keel-controlyesterday at 4:51 PM

glm 5.3 flash is the best model I have ever used

ChildOfChaosyesterday at 4:08 PM

How much usage do you find you get on these kinda models (I know the pricing changes a bit) compared to a $20 sub say for Google AI Pro in anti gravity?

I hate how difficult it is to compare prices when looking at subscriptions.

Would $20 in open router, using models like GLM get me more or less?

show 3 replies
alfiedotwtfyesterday at 7:15 PM

I’ve been trying out GLM 5.3 Flash the past < 30 hours, and although I’m only running at Q3, it feels different than most 100B to 200B models I’ve run before... More measured, thorough in thinking, and has so far passed all my private tests (and at Q3).

muditjaiyesterday at 6:29 PM

Nice how much does it cost?

kaiji1126today at 1:42 AM

[flagged]

paidxtoday at 1:12 AM

[flagged]

Shakahstoday at 2:04 AM

[dead]

imadeanaccountjyesterday at 6:10 PM

[dead]

rgbrgbyesterday at 4:26 PM

just tested (zai-org/GLM-5.3-Flash via together.ai) against latest DeepSeek-V4-Flash for a very specific task and thought i'd report here...

- price: DS4 wins... $0.0235 vs $0.0242 for ten tasks

- latency: GLM wins... 108s total against 154s

this is for a personal use-case where i'm detecting ads in a written transcript. sticking with ds4-flash for now since latency is not a critical factor