GLM 5.3 Flash vs GPT-6 Astra
Compare GLM 5.3 Flash and GPT-6 Astra side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Image Captioning, OCR, Classification, Object Detection, and Open Prompt.
Compare GLM 5.3 Flash vs GPT-6 Astra 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.
Upload an image
Drag and drop an image here, or click to browse
Models in this comparison
GLM 5.3 Flash vs GPT-6 Astra on Vision Evals
GPT-6 Astra scores higher on all six Vision Evals tasks.
The widest gap is Object Detection, where GPT-6 Astra leads 82.1% to 33.1%.
Overall, GLM 5.3 Flash averages 66.3% (#33 of 53) against 86.6% (#1 of 53) for GPT-6 Astra.
GLM 5.3 Flash is cheaper ($0.0002 vs $0.030 per sample), while GPT-6 Astra is faster (6.7s vs 6.8s per sample).
GLM 5.3 Flash vs GPT-6 Astra Comparison Table
Evals updated September 5, 2026Pricing updated September 5, 2026
| Property | GLM 5.3 Flash | GPT-6 Astra |
|---|---|---|
| Organization | Z.ai | OpenAI |
| Category | open | closed |
| Modality | multimodal | multimodal |
| Release Date | Aug 2026 | Sep 2026 |
| Context Window | 1.0M | 1.1M |
| Parameters | 320B total, 18B active | Undisclosed |
| License | MIT | Proprietary |
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input $/1M | $0.075 | $10.00 |
| Output $/1M | $0.250 | $50.00 |
| Vision Tasks | ||
| Captioning | Demo | Demo |
| Chart Question Answering | ||
| Classification | Demo | Demo |
| Document Question Answering | ||
| Image Tagging | ||
| Multi-Label Classification | ||
| Object Detection | Demo | Demo |
| OCR | Demo | Demo |
| Vision Language | ||
| Visual Question Answering | Demo | Demo |
| Model Features | ||
| Foundation Vision | ||
| LLMs with Vision Capabilities | ||
| Multimodal Vision | ||
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 6 vision tasks, pooled at low effort | ||
| Overall | 66.3% | 86.6% |
| Avg cost / sample | $0.0002 | $0.030 |
| Avg speed / sample | 6.78s | 6.67s |
| By task | ||
| Object Detection (low) | 33.1% | 82.1% ±0.8, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.0 to 82.7 |
| Object Detection (high) | – | 83.6% ±0.8, Mean of 3 runs, range 82.8 to 84.5 |
| Counting (low) | 55.4% | 80.2% ±1.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 78.4 to 81.1 |
| Counting (high) | – | 81.1% ±1.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 79.7 to 82.4 |
| Identification (low) | 84.4% | 89.6% ±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 87.5 to 90.6 |
| Identification (high) | – | 92.7% ±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 90.6 to 93.8 |
| OCR (low) | 90.6% | 91.9% ±0.2, Mean of 3 runs, range 91.6 to 92.1 |
| OCR (high) | – | 91.5% ±0.2, Mean of 3 runs, range 91.3 to 91.7 |
| Data Extraction (low) | 83.5% | 88.7% ±1.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 87.6 to 89.7 |
| Data Extraction (high) | – | 91.1% ±1.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 89.7 to 91.8 |
| Reasoning (low) | 51.0% | 87.2% ±1.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 86.1 to 88.1 |
| Reasoning (high) | 59.6% | 91.2% ±0.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 90.7 to 91.4 |
GLM 5.3 Flash vs GPT-6 Astra: Overview
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.
GPT-6 Astra is a proprietary multimodal reasoning model from OpenAI that accepts text and image input and produces text output. It is positioned as the company's flagship system for long-horizon end-to-end work spanning complex reasoning, software engineering, computer use, browsing, research and document creation. The model exposes a graduated reasoning effort control with low, medium, high, xhigh and max settings, and it accepts a change to that setting partway through a conversation rather than only at request time. It launches as a single tier with no smaller mini or nano variants, carries a context window of roughly 1.05 million tokens with a maximum output of 128,000 tokens, and reports a knowledge cutoff of April 30, 2026.
OpenAI reports evaluation results across agentic, scientific and security benchmarks, including 96.0% on GPQA Diamond, 64.6% on Terminal-Bench Science, 72.6% on OSWorld 2.0, and a perfect score on ExploitBench, along with near saturation on FrontierMath Tier 4 and ARC-AGI-3. The model supports computer use, structured outputs, streaming, programmatic tool calling, multi-agent orchestration, prompt caching and persisted reasoning, and it keeps earlier context windows searchable so it can recover requirements or tool outputs from previous turns. OpenAI describes Astra as the first of its models to cross the Critical cybersecurity capability threshold under its Preparedness Framework.
Frequently Asked Questions
On Roboflow's Vision Evals, GPT-6 Astra performed better. It scores higher on all six vision tasks and averages 86.6% (#1 of 53) against 66.3% (#33 of 53) for GLM 5.3 Flash. These scores measure vision capabilities only; either model may perform differently on work outside this benchmark's tasks.
No. On the Vision Evals Object Detection benchmark at low effort, GPT-6 Astra leads with 82.1% 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 $0.030. GLM 5.3 Flash is priced at $0.07 per 1M input tokens and $0.25 per 1M output; GPT-6 Astra is priced at $10.00 per 1M input tokens and $50.00 per 1M output. Actual costs depend on your image sizes, prompts, and output length.
GPT-6 Astra is faster. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals it averaged 6.7s per inference against 6.8s. 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 OCR in the free Roboflow Playground. You can try it instantly, and a free account unlocks unlimited runs.