Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run
GLM-5.3-Flash vs Hy3
GLM-5.3-Flash scores 65.1 (B) on agent readiness against Hy3's 62.6 (B), and leads in 2 of 5 scored categories. Hy3 leads on reach, risk and agent interface. 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
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
- Capability, 75 against 57
Watch for
Z.ai's smallest build is 328.4 GB in FP8, and no Ollama or LM Studio local build exists
Hy3 B
Best for Teams with an 8-GPU server who want an agent-tuned MoE model under plain Apache 2.0
Ahead on
- Reach, 70 against 60
- Risk, 60 against 55
- Agent interface, 75 against 70
Watch for
597.6 GB in BF16, 299.9 GB in FP8 and 168.5 GB at the smallest 4-bit build
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | GLM-5.3-Flash | Hy3 | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 35%35 | 75 | 57 | GLM-5.3-Flash +18 |
| Reach | 25%25 | 60 | 70 | Hy3 +10 |
| Risk | 20%20 | 55 | 60 | Hy3 +5 |
| Agent interface | 10%10 | 70 | 75 | Hy3 +5 |
| Documentation and upkeep | 10%10 | 58 | 56 | GLM-5.3-Flash +2 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | B 65.1/100 | B 62.6/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | GLM-5.3-Flash | Hy3 |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Open-weight model | Open-weight model |
| Vendor | Z.ai | Tencent (Hy team) |
| Hosted endpoint | no (local only) | no (local only) |
| Transports | ||
| Auth | None | None |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| x402 | no | no |
| Licence | MIT | Apache-2.0 |
| Read-only variant documented | no | no |
| llms.txt | no | no |
| Last release | 2026-08-26 | 2026-07-20 |
| Terms last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Privacy policy last updated | no document linked | no 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 reviews | 2.8/5 (4) | 2.8/5 (4) |
Verdicts
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.
Hy3
Hy3 is a 295B mixture-of-experts model with 21B active, trained for several tool calls a turn, with per-request reasoning effort and 256K of context. It needs an 8-GPU server for FP8 or about 200 GB for a 4-bit build. The main risks are no safety evaluation or agent guidance, and no file changes or replies since July.
Before you call either
GLM-5.3-Flash
- 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) - 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
- Pass
chat_template_kwargs: {"reasoning_effort": "low"}for short tasks; anything other than low or high falls back to max - Don't rely on
thinking: falsefrom SGLang's cookbook, since the template has no such switch and always opens a think block - Set
clear_thinking: truein chat use, since the default keeps earlier reasoning in the prompt - On a 128 GB machine only third-party low-bit builds come near fitting, none of them from Z.ai
Hy3
- Start it with vLLM on 8 GPUs, vllm serve tencent/Hy3-FP8 --tensor-parallel-size 8 --tool-call-parser hy_v3 --reasoning-parser hy_v3 --enable-auto-tool-choice --served-model-name hy3
- In SGLang use --tool-call-parser hunyuan --reasoning-parser hunyuan, as the card shows
- Pass reasoning_effort (no_think, low or high) in chat_template_kwargs; the default is no_think, and any other value raises a template error
- With the vLLM reasoning parser the chain of thought comes back in message.reasoning and the answer in message.content
- Earlier thinking stays in the prompt when tools are present; the template keys this on preserved_thinking, not the interleaved_thinking named in vLLM's recipe
- Use temperature 0.9 and top_p 1.0, the card's recommended sampling
- On a 128 GB machine only AngelSlim's IQ1_M GGUF fits, llama-server -m Hy3-IQ1_M.gguf -ctk q8_0 -ctv q8_0 -fa on -c 65536, with llama.cpp b11768 or later; at 89.4 GB × 1.2 it sits right at the 107.4 GB ceiling, so shorten the context if it fails to load, and expect a 1-bit build to fall short of Tencent's numbers
- Without the hardware, call it through Featherless AI or DeepInfra via Hugging Face's inference providers
Questions
Which is better for AI agents, GLM-5.3-Flash or Hy3?
GLM-5.3-Flash scores 65.1 (B) on agent readiness against Hy3's 62.6 (B), and leads in 2 of 5 scored categories. Hy3 leads on reach, risk and agent interface.
Other comparisons with GLM-5.3-Flash or Hy3
- Agents-A1-4B vs GLM-5.3-Flash
- Agents-A1-4B vs Hy3
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs GLM-5.3-Flash
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Hy3
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs GLM-5.3-Flash
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Hy3
- BigBang-v1 vs GLM-5.3-Flash
- BigBang-v1 vs Hy3
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs GLM-5.3-Flash
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs Hy3
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs GLM-5.3-Flash
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Hy3
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs GLM-5.3-Flash
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Hy3
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs GLM-5.3-Flash
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Hy3
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs GLM-5.3-Flash
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Hy3
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs GLM-5.3-Flash
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs Hy3
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs GLM-5.3-Flash
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs Hy3
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs GLM-5.3-Flash
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs Hy3
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs GLM-5.3-Flash
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Hy3
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs GLM-5.3-Flash
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Hy3
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs GLM-5.3-Flash
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Hy3
- GLM-4.5-Air vs GLM-5.3-Flash
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Hy3
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs GLM-5.3-Flash
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Hy3
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs gpt-oss-120b
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs gpt-oss-20b
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Granite 4.2 3B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Inkling
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Inkling-Small
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Kimi K3
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Kolibri-1
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Laguna M.1
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Laguna S 2.1
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Laguna XS 2.1
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs MiniCPM5-2B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs MiniMax-M2.5
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs MiniMax-M2.7
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs occamy-1.0
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Qwen3.5-2B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Qwen3.5-4B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Qwen3.5-9B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Qwen3.6-27B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Qwen3.8-27B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs SmolLM3-3B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- GLM-5.3 vs GLM-5.3-Flash
- GLM-5.3 vs Hy3
- gpt-oss-120b vs Hy3
- gpt-oss-20b vs Hy3
- Granite 4.2 3B vs Hy3
- Hy3 vs Inkling
- Hy3 vs Inkling-Small
- Hy3 vs InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview
- Hy3 vs Kimi K3
- Hy3 vs Kolibri-1
- Hy3 vs Laguna M.1
- Hy3 vs Laguna S 2.1
- Hy3 vs Laguna XS 2.1
- Hy3 vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Hy3 vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Hy3 vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- Hy3 vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- Hy3 vs MiniCPM5-2B
- Hy3 vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Hy3 vs MiniMax-M2.7
- Hy3 vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Hy3 vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- Hy3 vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- Hy3 vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- Hy3 vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- Hy3 vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- Hy3 vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- Hy3 vs occamy-1.0
- Hy3 vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- Hy3 vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- Hy3 vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- Hy3 vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- Hy3 vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- Hy3 vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- Hy3 vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- Hy3 vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- Hy3 vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Hy3 vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- Hy3 vs Qwen3.5-4B
- Hy3 vs Qwen3.5-9B
- Hy3 vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Hy3 vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- Hy3 vs Qwen3.8-27B
- Hy3 vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Hy3 vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Hy3 vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- Hy3 vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Hy3 vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- Hy3 vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Hy3 vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- Hy3 vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- Hy3 vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- Hy3 vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- Hy3 vs SmolLM3-3B
- Hy3 vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- Hy3 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Hy3 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Hy3 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
Machine-readable
- This page as Markdown
/compare/glm-5-3-flash-vs-hy3.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/glm-5-3-flash.json·/api/v1/tools/hy3.json - From a terminal
anchor compare glm-5-3-flash hy3(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "glm-5-3-flash", "b": "hy3"}at/mcp, no key