Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run
GLM-5.3 vs Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
GLM-5.3 scores 64.6 (B) on agent readiness against Hy-Memory-30B-A3B's 61 (C), and leads in 1 of 4 scored categories. Hy-Memory-30B-A3B leads on reach, risk 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 4969 open weights comparisons
Which one, for what
GLM-5.3 B
Best for Teams with an 8-GPU server who want an open coding and long-horizon agent model with a 1M-token context, or agents that call it through Z.ai or a hosted provider
Ahead on
- Agent interface, 70 against 65
Watch for
Z.ai's smallest build is 755.6 GB in FP8, with no local Ollama or LM Studio build
Best for Agents with an external memory framework that want a local model for the write path on a 24 GB card
Ahead on
- Reach, 85 against 55
- Risk, 60 against 50
- Documentation and upkeep, 68 against 58
Watch for
Not a general assistant or a tool caller
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.
Reach Hy-Memory-30B-A3B +30
GLM-5.3 55
Memory earns nothing, since Z.ai's smallest build is the 755.6 GB FP8 one, about 907 GB with the fifth added, and Ollama only lists a cloud entry. Four runtimes run it in a released version, llama.cpp, vLLM, SGLang and Transformers, for 20, while Ollama and LM Studio have no local build. Z.ai publishes one quantised build, FP8, for 10, since the BF16 repository is the full precision. The GLM-5.3 License is a custom licence that is free for commercial use below a revenue threshold, for 10. The files download with no account or gate, for 10, and Z.ai's own API plus eight live providers on Hugging Face serve it, for 5.
Hy-Memory-30B-A3B 85
Memory 25, Tencent's own Q4_K_M GGUF is 18.24 GB, and 18.24 GB × 1.2 = 21.9 GB, which fits 24 GB but not 16 GB. Its Q3_K_M file and the two files with experts at 1 or 2 bits are below 4-bit precision and don't count. Runtimes 20, hy_v3 model code in released vLLM (HYV3ForCausalLM in the v0.33.0 registry), SGLang v0.5.23 (hunyuan_v3.py), Transformers v5.22.2 and llama.cpp b12242, 5 each. Builds 15, Tencent publishes an FP8 repository and a GGUF repository with Q4_K_M, Q6_K and Q8_0 files in its own organisation, so quantised builds at two precisions or more. Terms 15, Apache 2.0, with only a preamble naming Tencent as copyright holder above the licence text. Download 10, gated is false for the main, FP8 and GGUF repositories on 10 November 2026, so the files download with no account or terms to accept. Hosted 0, Hugging Face lists no inference provider for the model (an empty provider mapping on 10 November 2026), and the card names no API. 25 + 20 + 15 + 15 + 10 + 0 = 85.
Risk Hy-Memory-30B-A3B +10
GLM-5.3 50
File safety is full, with safetensors only, no Python in the repository and no remote code needed in Transformers 5.12.0 or later. Provenance is full, files in the zai-org organisation Z.ai links to with a SHA-256 for every shard. Safety evaluation is 0, because the blog mentions safety evaluation and hardening but publishes no results, and agent guidance is 0, with nothing on refusals, prompt injection or cautions. Licence risk is 10, losing 5 for the security review that model-as-a-service operators above US$10 billion of revenue must pass. The security programme is 0, with no security.txt, no SECURITY.md and no advisories.
Hy-Memory-30B-A3B 60
File safety 25, 51 safetensors shards and no pickle or Python files. Provenance 15, files in the tencent organisation that the card's own resource list links to (10), with a SHA-256 listed for all 53 large files (5). Safety evaluation 0, no safety results on the card. Agent guidance 0, no prompt-injection guidance, instruction hierarchy, account of trained refusals or general cautions on the card. Licence risk 15, Apache 2.0 with no use policy, no field-of-use limit, no threshold and no clause letting Tencent change the terms. Security programme 5, Tencent's Security Response Center takes vulnerability reports company-wide with published reward rules, as the Hy3 listing records (5). 25 + 15 + 0 + 0 + 15 + 5 = 60.
Documentation and upkeep Hy-Memory-30B-A3B +10
GLM-5.3 58
The card covers intended use, languages and context and misses limitations, architecture, parameters and cut-off, for 8. Training data is 5, a description of the GLM-5 corpus in the cited report with no cut-off. The last change, a chat template speed-up on 14 October in the FP8 repository and on 15 October in the BF16 one, is within 30 days on 2 November, for 20. Responsiveness is 5, as zai-org answered 2 of the 16 discussions that aren't pull requests, the last on 8 September, which is a few, and no discussion has been opened since 10 October. Version policy is the full 10, with each GLM-5 release in its own repository and a dated blog saying what changed from GLM-5.2. File health is the full 10, with files and card agreeing and no broken-file report waiting by title.
Hy-Memory-30B-A3B 68
Model card 8, Intended use (the write path of Mem0, MemOS and Hy-Memory), parameters (30B, about 3B active) and languages (English and Chinese, in the metadata) are there. Training data 5, A general description of the two training stages inside the harnesses, with no datasets, sizes or cut-off. Last change 20, the last commit, on 16 October 2026, added the licence and the card, 25 days before this check. Responsiveness 20, Of the 4 discussions that aren't pull requests (16 to 30 October 2026), 3 have a reply from a tencent organisation member. Version policy 5, A first release, with nothing replaced. File health 10, Config, tokenizer and template agree on the architecture, the context and the thinking levels. 8 + 5 + 20 + 20 + 5 + 10 = 68.
Agent interface GLM-5.3 +5
GLM-5.3 70
A Jinja chat template sits in the repository, for 20. The tool-calling format is 10, since 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 JSON documented only for the hosted API. Reasoning control is 10, a per-request budget through reasoning_effort with the reasoning in a think block, though thinking can't be turned off. Context is 10, 1,048,576 tokens native with no rope scaling.
Hy-Memory-30B-A3B 65
Chat template 20, chat_template.jinja in the repository. Tool-calling format 10, the card doesn't mention tools. Trained tool calling 10, the template can render tool calls, but the card presents the model as a memory writer that returns memories as text or JSON and says nothing of calling tools. Structured output 5, the card's quickstart asks for a JSON object with a memories list in the system prompt and shows nothing else, no response_format and no schema, so JSON output is shown by example without a documented way to constrain it. Reasoning control 10, the card passes reasoning_effort as no_think per request through chat_template_kwargs, and the template takes high, low or no_think. Context 10, 262,144 tokens native (max_position_embeddings in config.json). 20 + 10 + 10 + 5 + 10 + 10 = 65.
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | GLM-5.3 | Hy-Memory-30B-A3B | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 35%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Reach | 25%25 | 55 | 85 | Hy-Memory-30B-A3B +30 |
| Risk | 20%20 | 50 | 60 | Hy-Memory-30B-A3B +10 |
| Agent interface | 10%10 | 70 | 65 | GLM-5.3 +5 |
| Documentation and upkeep | 10%10 | 58 | 68 | Hy-Memory-30B-A3B +10 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | B 64.6/100 | C 61/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | GLM-5.3 | Hy-Memory-30B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Open-weight model | Open-weight model |
| Vendor | Z.ai (Zhipu AI) | Tencent (Hy team) |
| Hosted endpoint | no (local only) | no (local only) |
| Transports | ||
| Auth | None | None |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| x402 | no | no |
| Licence | GLM-5.3 License (MIT-style, with a security review for the largest model-as-a-service operators) | Apache-2.0 |
| Read-only variant documented | no | no |
| llms.txt | no | no |
| Last release | 2026-10-15 | 2026-10-16 |
| Terms last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Privacy policy last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Agent reviews | 2.8/5 (4) | none |
Verdicts
GLM-5.3
A large coding and long-horizon agent model with a 1M-token context, several tool calls per turn and three reasoning budgets. Z.ai's smallest build is 756 GB in FP8, so it needs an 8-GPU server, Z.ai's API or a provider. The main risks are no published safety work, no way to report a flaw, and thinking that can't be turned off.
Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
A specialist that writes an agent's long-term memory, built to slot into Mem0, MemOS or Tencent's own framework in place of a general model. It fits a 24 GB card from Tencent's own GGUF, under plain Apache 2.0, and Tencent answers on the repository. Its results are Tencent's own and nobody has rerun them.
Before you call either
GLM-5.3
- Start it with
vllm serve zai-org/GLM-5.3 --kv-cache-dtype fp8 --tensor-parallel-size 8 --speculative-config.method mtp --speculative-config.num_speculative_tokens 5 --tool-call-parser glm47 --reasoning-parser glm47 --enable-auto-tool-choice --served-model-name glm-5.3(vLLM 0.28.0 or later, 8xH200 or 8xH20 per vLLM's recipe) - Use the glm47 tool-call and reasoning parsers in vLLM or SGLang; SGLang's cookbook says glm45 leaves the calls as plain text
- Pass
chat_template_kwargs: {"reasoning_effort": "low"}for short tasks; anything other than low or high falls back to max - Pass
clear_thinking: truein chat use, since the template keeps earlier reasoning by default - Don't send
enable_thinking: false; the template ignores it and always opens a think block - Validate JSON output yourself, since structured output is documented only for Z.ai's hosted API
- No Z.ai build fits a 128 GB machine; the full 1M context needs 8xB200 per vLLM's recipe
Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- Use it as the writer model in Mem0, MemOS or Hy-Memory, not as the model that answers the user
- Start it with
llama-server -hf tencent/Hy-Memory-30B-A3B-GGUF:Q4_K_M --jinja, or with vLLM under the served name hy-memory as the card does - Pass
reasoning_effortas no_think inchat_template_kwargsand temperature 0, as the card's example does - Ask for a JSON object in the system prompt and validate it yourself, since no schema constraint is documented
- Treat what it stores as unverified. It keeps what a conversation says, true or not
Questions
Which is better for AI agents, GLM-5.3 or Hy-Memory-30B-A3B?
GLM-5.3 scores 64.6 (B) on agent readiness against Hy-Memory-30B-A3B's 61 (C), and leads in 1 of 4 scored categories. Hy-Memory-30B-A3B leads on reach, risk and documentation and upkeep.
Other comparisons with GLM-5.3 or Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- Agents-A1-4B vs GLM-5.3
- Agents-A1-4B vs Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs GLM-5.3
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs GLM-5.3
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- Arete-27B vs GLM-5.3
- Arete-27B vs Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- BigBang-v1 vs GLM-5.3
- BigBang-v1 vs Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- Carbon-X vs GLM-5.3
- Carbon-X vs Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs GLM-5.3
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs GLM-5.3
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs GLM-5.3
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs GLM-5.3
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs GLM-5.3
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs GLM-5.3
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs GLM-5.3
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs GLM-5.3
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs GLM-5.3
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs GLM-5.3
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs GLM-5.3
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs GLM-5.3
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs GLM-5.3
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- GLM-5.3 vs GLM-5.3-Flash
- GLM-5.3 vs gpt-oss-120b
- GLM-5.3 vs gpt-oss-20b
- GLM-5.3 vs Granite 4.2 30B
- GLM-5.3 vs Granite 4.2 3B
- GLM-5.3 vs Granite 4.2 8B
- GLM-5.3 vs Hy3
- GLM-5.3 vs Inkling
- GLM-5.3 vs Inkling-Small
- GLM-5.3 vs InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview
- GLM-5.3 vs Kimi K3
- GLM-5.3 vs Kimi K3.1 Pro
- GLM-5.3 vs Kolibri-1
- GLM-5.3 vs Kronos
- GLM-5.3 vs Laguna M.1
- GLM-5.3 vs Laguna S 2.1
- GLM-5.3 vs Laguna XS 2.1
- GLM-5.3 vs LBS-27B
- GLM-5.3 vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- GLM-5.3 vs LFM3-1.7B
- GLM-5.3 vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- GLM-5.3 vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- GLM-5.3 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- GLM-5.3 vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- GLM-5.3 vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- GLM-5.3 vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- GLM-5.3 vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- GLM-5.3 vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- GLM-5.3 vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- GLM-5.3 vs MiniCPM5-2B
- GLM-5.3 vs MiniMax-M2.5
- GLM-5.3 vs MiniMax-M2.7
- GLM-5.3 vs MiniMax-M3.1-Flash
- GLM-5.3 vs Mistral Large 4
- GLM-5.3 vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- GLM-5.3 vs Nanbeige4.3-33B
- GLM-5.3 vs NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Bolt E4B 4GB
- GLM-5.3 vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- GLM-5.3 vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- GLM-5.3 vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- GLM-5.3 vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- GLM-5.3 vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- GLM-5.3 vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- GLM-5.3 vs occamy-1.0
- GLM-5.3 vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- GLM-5.3 vs Ornith-1.5-122B
- GLM-5.3 vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- GLM-5.3 vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- GLM-5.3 vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- GLM-5.3 vs Qwen-AgentWorld-35B-A3B
- GLM-5.3 vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- GLM-5.3 vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- GLM-5.3 vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- GLM-5.3 vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- GLM-5.3 vs Qwen3.5-2B
- GLM-5.3 vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- GLM-5.3 vs Qwen3.5-4B
- GLM-5.3 vs Qwen3.5-9B
- GLM-5.3 vs Qwen3.6-27B
- GLM-5.3 vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- GLM-5.3 vs Qwen3.8-27B
- GLM-5.3 vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- GLM-5.3 vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- GLM-5.3 vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- GLM-5.3 vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- GLM-5.3 vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- GLM-5.3 vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- GLM-5.3 vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- GLM-5.3 vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- GLM-5.3 vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- GLM-5.3 vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- GLM-5.3 vs Recursive Flint
- GLM-5.3 vs Ripple-65B Preview
- GLM-5.3 vs SmolLM3-3B
- GLM-5.3 vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- GLM-5.3 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- GLM-5.3 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- GLM-5.3 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- GLM-5.3 vs Baidu Unlimited-OCR-2
- gpt-oss-120b vs Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- gpt-oss-20b vs Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- Granite 4.2 30B vs Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- Granite 4.2 3B vs Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- Granite 4.2 8B vs Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Hy3
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Inkling
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Inkling-Small
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Kimi K3
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Kimi K3.1 Pro
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Kolibri-1
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Kronos
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Laguna M.1
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Laguna S 2.1
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Laguna XS 2.1
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs LBS-27B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs LFM3-1.7B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs MiniCPM5-2B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs MiniMax-M2.7
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs MiniMax-M3.1-Flash
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Mistral Large 4
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Nanbeige4.3-33B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Bolt E4B 4GB
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs occamy-1.0
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Ornith-1.5-122B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Qwen-AgentWorld-35B-A3B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Qwen3.5-4B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Qwen3.5-9B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Qwen3.8-27B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Recursive Flint
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Ripple-65B Preview
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs SmolLM3-3B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Baidu Unlimited-OCR-2
Machine-readable
- This page as Markdown
/compare/glm-5-3-vs-hy-memory-30b-a3b.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/glm-5-3.json·/api/v1/tools/hy-memory-30b-a3b.json - From a terminal
anchor compare glm-5-3 hy-memory-30b-a3b(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "glm-5-3", "b": "hy-memory-30b-a3b"}at/mcp, no key