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

GLM-5.3-Flash vs Ornith-1.5-122B

GLM-5.3-Flash scores 65.1 (B) on agent readiness against Ornith-1.5-122B's 61 (C), and leads in 2 of 4 scored categories. Ornith-1.5-122B leads on reach and agent interface. Both do open-weight models you run yourself.

Best open-weight models you download and run yourself for AI agents · All 4969 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

Ahead on

  • Risk, 55 against 50
  • Documentation and upkeep, 58 against 36

Watch for

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

Ornith-1.5-122B C

Best for Local coding and terminal agents on a 128 GB unified-memory machine or a 96 GB GPU setup, where a clear licence file and an answering publisher aren't required

Ahead on

  • Reach, 75 against 60
  • Agent interface, 85 against 70

Watch for

No LICENSE file though the card links one, and no notice for the Apache 2.0 Qwen3.5 and Gemma 4 work it builds on

Why the edge

Each category where one leads by five points or more, with the reason behind each side's score from its assessment. The numbers are in the table below; this is what they stand for.

Documentation and upkeep GLM-5.3-Flash +22

GLM-5.3-Flash 58

The card covers architecture, parameters and languages and misses four of the seven items, for 8. Training data is 5, a 30T-token corpus described with no sources or cut-off. The last change, a chat template speed-up on 15 October in both repositories, is within 30 days on 2 November, for 20; Z.ai's GLM-5 GitHub repository has changed only its docs since. Responsiveness is 10, as zai-org answered 14 of the 38 recent discussions others opened (26 August to 30 October), the last on 28 September, which is some but not most. Version policy is 5 for a first release, and file health is the full 10, with files and card agreeing and no broken-file report waiting as far as the research record shows.

Ornith-1.5-122B 36

Model card 11, it covers intended use, architecture, parameters and context but not limitations, languages or a knowledge cut-off. Training data 5, a description of the method with no data or cut-off. Last change 20, a folder upload to the MLX builds on 24 October 2026, 17 days ago. Responsiveness 0, Ornith answered none of the 5 questions and reports. Version policy 0, the MLX builds were uploaded a second time four days after the first with no note. File health 0, the card links a missing LICENSE, states hardware its own files don't fit and names a variant that doesn't exist, and the two chat templates differ. 11 + 5 + 20 + 0 + 0 + 0 = 36.

Reach Ornith-1.5-122B +15

GLM-5.3-Flash 60

Memory earns nothing, since Z.ai's smallest build is the 328.4 GB FP8 one, about 394 GB with the fifth added, and neither Ollama nor LM Studio has a local build (both list it as cloud only). Four runtimes run it in a released version, llama.cpp, vLLM, SGLang and Transformers, for 20, while Ollama and LM Studio don't. Z.ai publishes one quantised build, FP8, for 10. The MIT licence with nothing added gives the full 15, the files download with no account or gate for 10, and Z.ai's own API plus six providers on Hugging Face serve it, for 5.

Ornith-1.5-122B 75

Memory 10, since Ornith's own MLX 4-bit build is 69.7 GB and needs about 83.6 GB with the fifth added, over 64 GB and inside the reference machine's 107.4 GB, as do its Q4_K_M GGUF, its NVFP4 build and Ollama's build. Runtimes 25, the most the line gives, from vLLM 0.33.0, SGLang 0.5.23, Transformers 5.22.2, llama.cpp's qwen35moe architecture, Ollama's library and LM Studio's catalogue for the qwen35moe architecture. Builds 15, Ornith publishes FP8, NVFP4, GGUF and MLX at several precisions. Terms 15, MIT as named in the card's metadata, with nothing added, read by its terms though the repository has no licence file. Download 10, nothing is gated. Hosted 0, Ornith runs no API and no inference provider serves it. 10 + 25 + 15 + 15 + 10 + 0 = 75.

Agent interface Ornith-1.5-122B +15

GLM-5.3-Flash 70

A Jinja chat template sits in both repositories, for 20. The tool-calling format is 10, because it is defined only by the template and the glm47 parser is named by vLLM and SGLang rather than by Z.ai. The template takes several calls in one turn, for 20. Structured output is 0, with nothing on the card and only the hosted API documented for JSON. Reasoning control is 10, a per-request budget through reasoning_effort, with the reasoning coming back in a think block, though thinking can't be turned off. Context is 10, 1,048,576 tokens native with no rotary scaling.

Ornith-1.5-122B 85

Chat template 20, a Jinja file in the repository. Tool-calling format 25, the card shows how tools go in and how calls come back and names the parser for vLLM and SGLang. Trained tool calling 20, Ornith trains it on agent tasks and the template renders several calls in one turn. Structured output 0, not documented or claimed. Reasoning control 10, Ornith's template reads enable_thinking per request and the card says the reasoning comes back in reasoning_content, though the card doesn't name the switch. Context 10, 262,144 tokens native.

Risk GLM-5.3-Flash +5

GLM-5.3-Flash 55

File safety is full, with safetensors only, no Python and no remote code needed in Transformers 5.16.1 or later. Provenance is full, files in the zai-org organisation Z.ai links from GitHub with a SHA-256 for every shard. Safety evaluation and agent guidance are 0, as nothing is published on either. Licence risk is the full 15, since MIT adds no policy, threshold or changeable terms. The security programme is 0, with no security.txt on z.ai or docs.z.ai, no SECURITY.md on GitHub and no advisories found.

Ornith-1.5-122B 50

File safety 25, safetensors and GGUF only and no Python in any of Ornith's repositories for this size, so the card's --trust-remote-code flag loads nothing from the repository. Provenance 15, the files come from the ornith-ai organisation Ornith's blog links to, with a SHA-256 for every weight file. Safety evaluation 0 and agent guidance 0, nothing published on either. Licence risk 10, MIT carries no policy, threshold or changeable terms, but the card's licence link is broken. Security programme 0, no security.txt, disclosure policy or security contact.

Score by category

CategoryWeight this runGLM-5.3-FlashOrnith-1.5-122BEdge
Capability35%pendingpendingpendingnot scored in this run
Reach25%256075Ornith-1.5-122B +15
Risk20%205550GLM-5.3-Flash +5
Agent interface10%107085Ornith-1.5-122B +15
Documentation and upkeep10%105836GLM-5.3-Flash +22
Negative events≤1500
TotalB 65.1/100C 61/100

Facts side by side

FactGLM-5.3-FlashOrnith-1.5-122B
KindOpen-weight modelOpen-weight model
VendorZ.aiOrnith
Hosted endpointno (local only)no (local only)
Transports
AuthNoneNone
PricingFreeFree
x402nono
LicenceMITMIT
Read-only variant documentednono
llms.txtnono
Last release2026-08-262026-10-24
Terms last updatedno document linkedno document linked
Privacy policy last updatedno document linkedno document linked
Agent reviews2.8/5 (4)none

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.

Ornith-1.5-122B

The largest Ornith that fits a 128 GB machine, a coding and terminal-agent cousin on Qwen3.5-122B-A10B's architecture with XML tool calls and 262,144 tokens of context. Its 4-bit builds need 84 to 93 GB. The main risk is an absent publisher, with no licence file, safety results or replies, and a card that misstates the hardware.

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

Ornith-1.5-122B

  1. Start it with ollama run ornith-1.5:122b-q4_K_M, or llama-server -hf ornith-ai/Ornith-1.5-122B-GGUF:Q4_K_M --jinja -c 262144
  2. Budget about 92 GB for the Q4_K_M GGUF with a working context, and less context if the machine has under 100 GB for the model
  3. In vLLM pass --enable-auto-tool-choice --tool-call-parser qwen3_xml --reasoning-parser qwen3, and in SGLang --tool-call-parser qwen3_coder --reasoning-parser qwen3, so tool calls and reasoning come back parsed
  4. Thinking is on by default. Send chat_template_kwargs with enable_thinking false for short tasks, a switch the card doesn't mention
  5. Pin which template your runtime loads, since chat_template.jinja keeps earlier reasoning and the tokenizer_config.json template drops it
  6. Use temperature 0.6, top_p 0.95, top_k 20 for coding and temperature 1.0 for general tasks, as the card recommends
  7. Add mmproj-Ornith-1.5-122B-BF16.gguf (0.9 GB) for image input in llama.cpp, and validate JSON output yourself, since structured output isn't documented

Questions

Which is better for AI agents, GLM-5.3-Flash or Ornith-1.5-122B?

GLM-5.3-Flash scores 65.1 (B) on agent readiness against Ornith-1.5-122B's 61 (C), and leads in 2 of 4 scored categories. Ornith-1.5-122B leads on reach and agent interface.

Other comparisons with GLM-5.3-Flash or Ornith-1.5-122B

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.