Roboflow

Gemini 3.1 Pro vs GLM 5.3 Flash

Compare Gemini 3.1 Pro and GLM 5.3 Flash side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Image Captioning, Open Prompt, Classification, OCR, and Object Detection.

Compare Gemini 3.1 Pro vs GLM 5.3 Flash live

Run the same image across every model that supports a task and compare their outputs side-by-side.

Detect and compare bounding boxes across models on the same image.

Open Object Detection in the full playground
GoogleGemini 3.1 Pro
Run to compare this model.
Z.aiGLM 5.3 Flash
Run to compare this model.

Models in this comparison

Gemini 3.1 Pro vs GLM 5.3 Flash on Vision Evals

Gemini 3.1 Pro scores higher on all six Vision Evals tasks.

The widest gap is Object Detection, where Gemini 3.1 Pro leads 67.6% to 33.1%.

Overall, Gemini 3.1 Pro averages 83.1% (#5 of 33) against 66.3% (#22 of 33) for GLM 5.3 Flash.

GLM 5.3 Flash is both cheaper ($0.0002 vs $0.0093 per sample) and faster (6.8s vs 7.8s per sample).

Gemini 3.1 ProGLM 5.3 Flash

Gemini 3.1 Pro vs GLM 5.3 Flash Comparison Table

Evals updated August 26, 2026Pricing updated August 26, 2026

PropertyGemini 3.1 ProGLM 5.3 Flash
OrganizationGoogleZ.ai
Categoryclosedopen
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateFeb 2026Aug 2026
Context Window1.0M1.0M
Parameters320B total, 18B active
LicenseProprietaryMIT
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$2.00
Output $/1M$12.00
Vision Tasks
CaptioningDemoDemo
Chart Question Answering
ClassificationDemoDemo
Document Question Answering
Image Tagging
Multi-Label Classification
Object DetectionDemoDemo
OCRDemoDemo
Vision Language
Visual Question AnsweringDemoDemo
Model Features
Foundation Vision
LLMs with Vision Capabilities
Multimodal Vision
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 6 vision tasks, pooled at low effort
Overall
83.1%
66.3%
Avg cost / sample$0.0093$0.0002
Avg speed / sample7.81s6.78s
By task
Object Detection
67.6%
$0.010
33.1%
$0.0004
Counting
71.6%
$0.0071
55.4%
$0.0001
Identification
100.0%
$0.0070
84.4%
$0.0001
OCR
92.6%
$0.0066
90.6%
$0.0002
Data Extraction
94.8%
$0.0063
83.5%
$0.0001
Reasoning (low)
72.2%
$0.012
51.0%
$0.0001
Reasoning (high)
74.8%
$0.021
59.6%
$0.0001

Gemini 3.1 Pro vs GLM 5.3 Flash: Overview

Gemini 3.1 Pro

Gemini 3.1 Pro is a proprietary multimodal model from Google’s Gemini 3 series, released in early 2026 and designed for advanced reasoning across large multimodal datasets. It accepts text, images, audio, video, and documents, supporting up to a 1-million-token input context with up to 64k output tokens. Compared with Gemini 3 Pro, it improves long-context synthesis and multi-step reasoning, enabling more reliable analysis of large documents, datasets, and software codebases.

The model also advances visual understanding and grounding, allowing it to interpret UI screenshots, diagrams, and real-world scenes while referencing specific regions within images or video. These capabilities make Gemini 3.1 Pro well suited for multimodal workflows involving document processing, interface analysis, robotics research, and complex visual reasoning.

GLM 5.3 Flash

GLM-5.3-Flash is the first natively multimodal model in Z.ai's GLM-5 series, a mixture-of-experts transformer with roughly 320 billion total parameters and 18 billion activated per token. It routes each token through 8 of 288 experts across 45 language layers that interleave KDA linear attention with sparse multi-head latent attention, and pairs them with a 24-layer vision encoder that handles image and video input. The checkpoint declares a maximum context length of 1,048,576 tokens, ships in native FP8, and includes a multi-token prediction draft layer for speculative decoding. Z.ai reports that the hybrid attention design reduces attention computation by 3.01x and KV cache size by 4.44x relative to GLM-5.3.

The model starts from a newly trained base built on a 30 trillion token multimodal pre-training corpus and adopts Manifold-Constrained Hyper-Connections to improve scaling efficiency. Vision is integrated into the coding and agent loop, so the model can inspect interfaces, rendered output, and images while operating across code, browsers, and graphical user interfaces. Z.ai reports scores of 84.3 on Terminal-Bench 2.1, 63.4 on DeepSWE 1.1, 55.3 on Humanity's Last Exam with tools, and 48.8 on AutomationBench, and the model exposes low, high, and max thinking modes.

Frequently Asked Questions

On Roboflow's Vision Evals, Gemini 3.1 Pro performed better. It scores higher on all six vision tasks and averages 83.1% (#5 of 33) against 66.3% (#22 of 33) for GLM 5.3 Flash. These scores measure vision capabilities only; either model may perform differently on work outside this benchmark's tasks.

Yes. On the Vision Evals Object Detection benchmark, Gemini 3.1 Pro leads with 67.6% against 33.1%. This is the widest gap between the two models across the benchmark's tasks.

GLM 5.3 Flash is cheaper to run. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals task mix it averaged $0.0002 per sample against $0.0093. Actual costs depend on your image sizes, prompts, and output length.

GLM 5.3 Flash is faster. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals it averaged 6.8s per inference against 7.8s. Latency varies with image size, prompt length, and provider load, so treat these as relative rather than guaranteed figures.

Yes. The comparison demo on this page runs both models on the same image side by side for image captioning and open prompts in the free Roboflow Playground. You can try it instantly, and a free account unlocks unlimited runs.