Roboflow

Gemini 3.6 Flash vs GLM 5.3 Flash

Compare Gemini 3.6 Flash and GLM 5.3 Flash side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Open Prompt, Classification, Image Captioning, OCR, and Object Detection.

Compare Gemini 3.6 Flash 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 3.6 Flash
Run to compare this model.
Z.aiGLM 5.3 Flash
Run to compare this model.

Models in this comparison

Gemini 3.6 Flash vs GLM 5.3 Flash on Vision Evals

Gemini 3.6 Flash scores higher on all five Vision Evals tasks.

The widest gap is Reasoning, where Gemini 3.6 Flash leads 77.7% to 51.0%.

Overall, Gemini 3.6 Flash averages 77.1% (#9 of 61) against 55.8% (#42 of 61) for GLM 5.3 Flash.

GLM 5.3 Flash is both cheaper ($0.0006 vs $0.0033 per sample) and faster (9.3s vs 10.4s per sample).

Gemini 3.6 FlashGLM 5.3 Flash

Gemini 3.6 Flash vs GLM 5.3 Flash Comparison Table

Evals updated October 8, 2026Pricing updated October 10, 2026

PropertyGemini 3.6 FlashGLM 5.3 Flash
OrganizationGoogleZ.ai
Categoryclosedopen
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateJul 2026Aug 2026
Context Window1.0M1.0M
ParametersUnknown320B total, 18B active
LicenseProprietaryMIT
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$0.750$0.150
Output $/1M$3.75$0.500
Vision Tasks
CaptioningDemoDemo
Chart Question AnsweringSupportedSupported
ClassificationDemoDemo
Document Question AnsweringSupportedSupported
Image TaggingSupportedSupported
Multi-Label ClassificationSupportedSupported
Object DetectionDemoDemo
OCRDemoDemo
Vision LanguageSupportedSupported
Visual Question AnsweringDemoDemo
Video ClassificationSupportedNot listed
Model Features
Foundation VisionSupportedSupported
LLMs with Vision CapabilitiesSupportedSupported
Multimodal VisionSupportedSupported
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 5 vision tasks, pooled at low effort
Overall
77.1%
55.8%
Avg cost / sample$0.0033$0.0006
Avg speed / sample10.43s9.29s
By task
Object Detection (low)
57.1%
±1.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 55.9 to 59.4
$0.0041
33.1%
$0.0008
Object Detection (high)
70.7%
±0.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 70.3 to 71.2
$0.0093
–
Counting (low)
80.2%
±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 78.4 to 82.4
$0.0034
55.4%
$0.0002
Counting (high)
79.3%
±2.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 77.0 to 82.4
$0.0089
–
Identification (low)
99.0%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 96.9 to 100.0
$0.0015
84.4%
$0.0002
Identification (high)
100.0%
±0.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 100.0 to 100.0
$0.0033
–
OCR (low)
71.8%
$0.0030
55.4%
$0.0007
by category
Single value
68.3%
Transcription
89.4%
Structured JSON
82.9%
Text localization
42.5%
Single value
47.4%
Transcription
81.5%
Structured JSON
72.0%
Text localization
18.6%
OCR (high)
77.4%
$0.014
55.3%
$0.0011
by category
Single value
68.7%
Transcription
90.3%
Structured JSON
89.3%
Text localization
62.1%
Single value
50.9%
Transcription
72.2%
Structured JSON
72.0%
Text localization
14.5%
Reasoning (low)
77.7%
±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 76.2 to 80.1
$0.0031
51.0%
$0.0002
Reasoning (high)
81.0%
±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 79.5 to 83.4
$0.0091
59.6%
$0.0003

Gemini 3.6 Flash vs GLM 5.3 Flash: Overview

Gemini 3.6 Flash

Gemini 3.6 Flash is a multimodal language model from Google DeepMind, positioned as the workhorse tier in the Gemini 3.x family. It accepts text, image, video, audio, and PDF inputs with a 1 million token context window and produces up to 64,000 output tokens. The model builds directly on Gemini 3.5 Flash, incorporating developer and customer feedback to improve token efficiency, coding quality, and knowledge work performance. According to the Artificial Analysis Index, it consumes 17% fewer output tokens than its predecessor, and on some benchmarks such as DeepSWE, token reduction reaches up to 65%. It supports function calling, structured output, search as a tool, and code execution, and includes computer use as a built-in capability in the Gemini API and Gemini Enterprise.

On coding benchmarks, Gemini 3.6 Flash scores 49% on DeepSWE versus 37% for 3.5 Flash, and 63.9% on MLE Bench versus 49.7%. Computer use performance on OSWorld-Verified improves from 78.4% to 83%, and knowledge work scores on GDPval-AA v2 rise from 1349 to 1421. The model carries a knowledge cutoff of March 2026 and ships with enhanced Frontier Safety safeguards covering chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, and cyber offense domains, with training to minimize refusals for beneficial uses. It is a proprietary, closed-weights model available in preview through the Gemini API via Google AI Studio, Android Studio, Google Antigravity, Gemini Enterprise, and the Gemini app.

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 3.6 Flash performed better. It scores higher on all five vision tasks and averages 77.1% (#9 of 61) against 55.8% (#42 of 61) 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 Reasoning benchmark at low effort, Gemini 3.6 Flash leads with 77.7% against 51.0%. 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 $0.0006 per sample against $0.0033. Gemini 3.6 Flash is priced at $0.75 per 1M input tokens and $3.75 per 1M output; GLM 5.3 Flash is priced at $0.15 per 1M input tokens and $0.50 per 1M output. Actual costs depend on your image sizes, prompts, and output length.

GLM 5.3 Flash is faster. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals it averaged 9.3s per inference against 10.4s. 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 open prompts and image classification in the free Roboflow Playground. You can try it instantly, and a free account unlocks unlimited runs.