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

GLM-5.3-Flash vs occamy-1.0

GLM-5.3-Flash scores 65.1 (B) on agent readiness against occamy-1.0's 61 (C), and leads in 0 of 4 scored categories. occamy-1.0 leads on reach and documentation and upkeep. 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

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

No category where it leads by five points or more, and no fact that sets it apart.

Watch for

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

occamy-1.0 C

Best for Agents that want an Apache 2.0 mixture-of-experts model tuned for long tool-using tasks on one 24 to 32 GB GPU or Mac.

Ahead on

  • Reach, 85 against 60
  • Documentation and upkeep, 74 against 58

Watch for

No safety results, prompt-injection guidance or security contact

Score by category

CategoryWeight this runGLM-5.3-Flashoccamy-1.0Edge
Capability35%pendingpendingpendingnot scored in this run
Reach25%256085occamy-1.0 +25
Risk20%205555even
Agent interface10%107070even
Documentation and upkeep10%105874occamy-1.0 +16
Negative events≤1500
TotalB 65.1/100C 61/100

Facts side by side

FactGLM-5.3-Flashoccamy-1.0
KindOpen-weight modelOpen-weight model
VendorZ.aiAccio (Accio-Lab)
Hosted endpointno (local only)no (local only)
Transports
AuthNoneNone
PricingFreeFree
x402nono
LicenceMITApache-2.0
Read-only variant documentednono
llms.txtnono
Last release2026-08-262026-10-02
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 reviews2.8/5 (4)3/5 (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.

occamy-1.0

A Qwen3.6-35B-A3B fine-tuned for long agent work with tools, files and code, under plain Apache 2.0, and Accio's 4-bit builds run in about 23 GB. The main gaps are no safety results, agent guidance or security contact, and every benchmark figure is Accio's own.

Before you call either

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

occamy-1.0

  1. Serve with --reasoning-parser qwen3 --enable-auto-tool-choice --tool-call-parser qwen3_coder on vLLM 0.19.0 or SGLang 0.5.10 and later
  2. BF16 is 70.2 GB, so on a 128 GB machine run it without the card's 8-way tensor parallelism
  3. Keep the whole assistant message, reasoning and tool calls included, in later turns, as the card says
  4. Sampling per the card is temperature 1.0, top_p 0.95, top_k 20 and presence_penalty 1.5
  5. With the GGUFs, NFC-normalise input text and read TOKENIZER.md, since the files store qwen2 pre-tokenizer metadata
  6. The base's MTP layer isn't in this checkpoint, Accio-Lab/occamy-1.0-MTP is an experimental separate head

Questions

Which is better for AI agents, GLM-5.3-Flash or occamy-1.0?

GLM-5.3-Flash scores 65.1 (B) on agent readiness against occamy-1.0's 61 (C), and leads in 0 of 4 scored categories. occamy-1.0 leads on reach and documentation and upkeep.

Other comparisons with GLM-5.3-Flash or occamy-1.0

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.