GLM-5.3 Flash vs Laguna S 2.1: Specs & Benchmark Comparison
| Characteristic | GLM-5.3 Flash | Laguna S 2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Company | Zhipu AI | Poolside |
| Release Date | August 26, 2026 | July 21, 2026 |
| Parameters | 320B | 118B |
| Multimodal | Yes | No |
| Context (input) | 1.0M | 1.0M |
| Context (output) | 131K | — |
| Input Price / 1M | $0.15 | $0.10 |
| Output Price / 1M | $0.50 | $0.20 |
| Average Score | 0.6 | 0.6 |
| Benchmarks | ||
| Toolathlon Verified | 0.8 | 0.5 |
| DeepSWE 1.1 | 0.6 | 0.4 |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 | 0.8 | 0.7 |
Visual Benchmark Comparison
GLM-5.3 Flash
Laguna S 2.1
Toolathlon Verified0.8 vs 0.5
0.8
0.5
DeepSWE 1.10.6 vs 0.4
0.6
0.4
Terminal-Bench 2.10.8 vs 0.7
0.8
0.7
Verdict
Both models show equal results — the choice depends on your specific use case.
Overall Performance
Both models show comparable average scores: GLM-5.3 Flash — 0.6, Laguna S 2.1 — 0.6.
API Cost
Laguna S 2.1 is 2.2x cheaper: input $0.10/1M vs $0.15/1M tokens.
Context Window
Same context size: 1M tokens.
Recency
GLM-5.3 Flash is newer: released 8/26/2026 vs 7/21/2026.
More About These Models
Related Comparisons
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is better for coding — GLM-5.3 Flash or Laguna S 2.1?
Direct comparison on the SWE-Bench benchmark is not available. We recommend reviewing other metrics on the comparison page.
Which model is cheaper — GLM-5.3 Flash or Laguna S 2.1?
Laguna S 2.1 is cheaper for input: $0.10 per 1M tokens vs $0.15.
Which has a larger context window — GLM-5.3 Flash or Laguna S 2.1?
GLM-5.3 Flash supports a larger context: 1,048,576 tokens vs 1,048,576.
The GLM-5.3 Flash and Laguna S 2.1 comparison is updated for 2026. Data includes benchmark results, API pricing, context window size and other specifications. For more detailed information, visit the GLM-5.3 Flash or Laguna S 2.1 page. See also the complete list of AI model comparisons.