DeepSeek V4-Pro wins on coding (93 vs 91) and price ($0.435 vs $1.4/1M input). For most workflows, DeepSeek V4-Pro is the stronger default — best open-weights flagship — near-frontier coding at a tenth of the price.
The safest GLM-5.3 vs DeepSeek V4-Pro default, the cheaper option worth trying first, and the specialist pick — before you read the detail below.
DeepSeek V4-Pro is the strongest answer here for GLM-5.3 vs DeepSeek V4-Pro — pick it when quality of output matters more than the $0.43/1M/1M input you pay for it.
GPT-5.1-Codex-Max is the cheaper way in for GLM-5.3 vs DeepSeek V4-Pro, at $1.25/1M/1M input against DeepSeek V4-Pro's $0.43/1M/1M.
GLM-5.3 is the fastest of these for GLM-5.3 vs DeepSeek V4-Pro — worth it when latency is what the reader notices, not the last few points of reasoning depth.
DeepSeek V4-Pro leads on coding with a score of 93 vs 91 for GLM-5.3.
DeepSeek V4-Pro is cheaper at $0.435/1M input tokens vs $1.4/1M for GLM-5.3.
DeepSeek V4-Pro is the stronger default for coding tasks.
DeepSeek V4-Pro is the safer default: it is built for frontier-level coding and reasoning on a budget, which covers most of what people bring to this comparison.
GLM-5.3 earns its place when your work is mostly agentic engineering and security work on open weights, even though it loses the overall count here.
Both models serve different primary workflows — DeepSeek V4-Pro for frontier-level coding and reasoning on a budget, GLM-5.3 for agentic engineering and security work on open weights — so running each where it has a clear edge often beats forcing one to do both.
Switch the scoring lens to see whether the GLM-5.3 vs DeepSeek V4-Pro answer changes when cost, speed, or long-document depth leads the decision.
DeepSeek / Budget / Aug 6, 2026
Best open-weights flagship — near-frontier coding at a tenth of the price.
Ranks models by the broadest mix of coding, writing, research, and long-context usefulness.
You need vision input, verified agentic performance, or predictable pricing (surge pricing and an announced increase loom).
Where the GLM-5.3 vs DeepSeek V4-Pro recommendation shifts once you weigh price or latency differently.
Same price as GLM-5.2, far stronger on agents and security.
Best open-weights flagship — near-frontier coding at a tenth of the price.
List prices and published scores — the numbers this page's pick is built from.
| Model | Input | Output | Est. month | Context | Speed | Coding | Writing | Research |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DeepSeek V4-ProDeepSeek | $0.43/1M | $0.87/1M | $6.09 | 1M tokens | Balanced | 93 | 80 | 85 |
| GLM-5.3Z.ai | $1.40/1M | $4.40/1M | $23 | 1M tokens | Balanced | 91 | 79 | 82 |
Scores out of 100 — how we evaluate models. “Est. month” is 10M in / 2M out at list price: a ceiling, no discounts.
Why each one is on the shortlist for GLM-5.3 vs DeepSeek V4-Pro, what it is genuinely good at, and where we would steer you away from it.
Our pick for GLM-5.3 vs DeepSeek V4-Pro. It scores 93/100 on the coding axis we weight this page by, and nothing else in this shortlist matches it on output quality.
DeepSeek's 1.6T-parameter (49B active) MoE flagship with hybrid sparse attention — near-frontier coding and reasoning at roughly a tenth of closed-rival pricing, MIT-licensed open weights.
You need vision input, verified agentic performance, or predictable pricing (surge pricing and an announced increase loom).
The open-weights frontier flagship of 2026. Self-reported numbers flatter it and independent agentic scores land lower, but even discounted it's the most capability per dollar in the directory's upper tier — with MIT-licensed weights.
Full pricing, benchmark table and release notes on the DeepSeek V4-Pro page.
The fastest model in this shortlist for GLM-5.3 vs DeepSeek V4-Pro. Pick it when turnaround is what your readers or users notice.
Z.ai's newest flagship, aimed squarely at software engineering, autonomous agents and cybersecurity — and the first open-weights model to beat Claude Mythos 5 on a security benchmark.
Your procurement process requires a SWE-bench Verified figure, or you need the closed-frontier reasoning ceiling.
The clear upgrade over GLM-5.2 at the same price — take it unless you specifically need a published SWE-bench Verified number to sign off on. The security benchmark lead over Mythos 5 is the genuinely new thing here.
Full pricing, benchmark table and release notes on the GLM-5.3 page.
UseRightAI recommendations are based on practical decision factors people actually feel in day-to-day use.
Newsletter
We email when the GLM-5.3 vs DeepSeek V4-Pro pick changes, when one of these models moves on price, or when something new displaces the current leader.
No spam. Useful updates only. Affiliate disclosures always clearly labeled.
DeepSeek V4-Pro wins on more of the categories we score — coding, reasoning, budget — so it is the better default of the two. GLM-5.3 is the better pick when your work is mostly agentic engineering and security work on open weights. Neither is universally "better": DeepSeek V4-Pro is aimed at frontier-level coding and reasoning on a budget, GLM-5.3 at agentic engineering and security work on open weights.
DeepSeek V4-Pro is cheaper at $0.435/1M input and $0.87/1M output. GLM-5.3 costs $1.4/1M input and $4.4/1M output.
Both GLM-5.3 and DeepSeek V4-Pro have the same 1M context window.
DeepSeek V4-Pro is better for coding with a score of 93 vs GLM-5.3's 91 (out of 100). GPT-6 Astra is the overall coding leader in this directory at 100/100.
Both GLM-5.3 and DeepSeek V4-Pro have similar speed profiles — rated balanced. Neither will be the bottleneck if latency is your deciding factor.
Independent harnesses report much lower agentic scores than the self-reported numbers; trails GPT-5.6 and Opus-class on hard agentic evals. Peak-hour surge pricing doubles rates, a price increase is announced, and it's text-only (no vision). Avoid it if you need vision input, verified agentic performance, or predictable pricing (surge pricing and an announced increase loom). That is the main case for looking at GLM-5.3 instead.
No published SWE-bench Verified score, so it is absent from the benchmark most buyers compare on. Priced identically to GLM-5.2 at $1.40/$4.40 — the upgrade is capability, not value. Avoid it if your procurement process requires a SWE-bench Verified figure, or you need the closed-frontier reasoning ceiling. Against DeepSeek V4-Pro specifically, the gap shows up most on coding (93 vs 91).
Take a moderate workload of 10M input and 2M output tokens a month. GLM-5.3 runs $22.80 (at $1.4/1M in and $4.4/1M out); DeepSeek V4-Pro runs $6.09 (at $0.435/1M in and $0.87/1M out). That is a $16.71/month difference — DeepSeek V4-Pro is the cheaper of the two at this volume, and the gap scales linearly as you send more. Output tokens dominate the bill on both, so prompt length matters far less than response length.
Yes, and for most teams that beats picking one. A common split is DeepSeek V4-Pro for frontier-level coding and reasoning on a budget, with GLM-5.3 handling agentic engineering and security work on open weights. Since DeepSeek V4-Pro is both the stronger and the cheaper option here, a split mainly makes sense if GLM-5.3 covers a capability you specifically need.