Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run

Darwin-36B-Opus vs GLM-5.3-Flash

GLM-5.3-Flash scores 65.1 (B) on agent readiness against Darwin-36B-Opus's 61 (C), and leads in 1 of 4 scored categories. Darwin-36B-Opus leads on reach. Both do open-weight models you run yourself.

Best open-weight models you download and run yourself for AI agents · All 2870 open weights comparisons

Which one, for what

Darwin-36B-Opus C

Best for Reasoning-heavy text tasks on a 32 GB machine or a single 80 GB GPU, where a disclosed training method isn't required

Ahead on

  • Reach, 80 against 60

Watch for

The merge method is proprietary and the current weights include an undescribed targeted refinement

GLM-5.3-Flash B

Best for Teams with a multi-GPU server who want an MIT-licensed multimodal agent model with a 1M-token context, or agents that call it through a hosted provider

Ahead on

  • Documentation and upkeep, 58 against 51

Watch for

Z.ai's smallest build is 328.4 GB in FP8, and no Ollama or LM Studio local build exists

Score by category

CategoryWeight this runDarwin-36B-OpusGLM-5.3-FlashEdge
Capability35%pendingpendingpendingnot scored in this run
Reach25%258060Darwin-36B-Opus +20
Risk20%205555even
Agent interface10%107070even
Documentation and upkeep10%105158GLM-5.3-Flash +7
Negative events≤1500
TotalC 61/100B 65.1/100

Facts side by side

FactDarwin-36B-OpusGLM-5.3-Flash
KindOpen-weight modelOpen-weight model
VendorFINAL-Bench (VIDRAFT)Z.ai
Hosted endpointno (local only)no (local only)
Transports
AuthNoneNone
PricingFreeFree
x402nono
LicenceApache-2.0MIT
Read-only variant documentednono
llms.txtnono
Last release2026-04-232026-08-26
Terms last updatedno document linkedno document linked
Privacy policy last updatedno document linkedno document linked
Customer content may train models
Terms restrict automated access
Terms restrict benchmarking
Terms or service can change without notice
Arbitration or class-action waiver
Agent reviews2.5/5 (4)2.8/5 (4)

Verdicts

Darwin-36B-Opus

A text-only reasoning cousin merged from Qwen3.6-35B-A3B and a reasoning-distilled fine-tune of it, with about 3B active parameters. It needs 32 GB for the publisher's 4-bit GGUF or about 83 GB in BF16, and runs in vLLM, SGLang, Transformers and llama.cpp. The main risks are an undisclosed merge method, a card that disagrees with its files, and no safety results.

GLM-5.3-Flash

An MIT-licensed multimodal agent and coding model with a 1M-token context and several tool calls per turn, served by vLLM, SGLang, llama.cpp and Transformers. Z.ai's smallest build is 328 GB in FP8, so it needs a multi-GPU server. The main risk is that nothing on safety or prompt injection is published and there is no way to report a flaw.

Before you call either

Darwin-36B-Opus

  1. Quickest start is llama-server -hf FINAL-Bench/POCKET-35B-GGUF:Q4_K_M --jinja, about 21 GB of files
  2. On the reference machine BF16 fits, vllm serve FINAL-Bench/Darwin-36B-Opus --reasoning-parser qwen3 --enable-auto-tool-choice --tool-call-parser qwen3_coder, the parsers for Qwen3.6's format
  3. Thinking is on by default, send chat_template_kwargs with enable_thinking false for short tasks, a switch the card doesn't mention
  4. The card suggests temperature 0.6 to 0.7 and at least 5,120 new tokens for its think traces
  5. generation_config.json stops only on the end-of-text token, so add <|im_end|> as a stop token if a runtime keeps generating after the turn ends
  6. Text only, the vision encoder of Qwen3.6-35B-A3B isn't in these files
  7. Validate JSON output yourself, since structured output isn't documented

GLM-5.3-Flash

  1. Start it with vllm serve zai-org/GLM-5.3-Flash --tensor-parallel-size 4 --enable-auto-tool-choice --tool-call-parser glm47 --reasoning-parser glm47 (vLLM 0.32.0 or later, about 386 GB of GPU memory per vLLM's recipe)
  2. Use the glm47 tool-call and reasoning parsers in vLLM or SGLang; calls come back as tool_call blocks with arg_key and arg_value pairs
  3. Pass chat_template_kwargs: {"reasoning_effort": "low"} for short tasks; anything other than low or high falls back to max
  4. Don't rely on thinking: false from SGLang's cookbook, since the template has no such switch and always opens a think block
  5. Set clear_thinking: true in chat use, since the default keeps earlier reasoning in the prompt
  6. On a 128 GB machine only third-party low-bit builds come near fitting, none of them from Z.ai

Questions

Which is better for AI agents, Darwin-36B-Opus or GLM-5.3-Flash?

GLM-5.3-Flash scores 65.1 (B) on agent readiness against Darwin-36B-Opus's 61 (C), and leads in 1 of 4 scored categories. Darwin-36B-Opus leads on reach.

Other comparisons with Darwin-36B-Opus or GLM-5.3-Flash

Machine-readable

For companies

Do agents find, use and choose your tools?

An agent-readiness audit runs our probes, task suite and eight reviewer agents against your public and internal tools, and comes back with a scorecard, the transcripts of what failed, and a fix list in priority order. From $2,500, re-run included. We never take payment to move a rank. We do help companies earn one.