Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run
GLM-5.3 vs LFM3-Audio-2B
GLM-5.3 scores 64.6 (B) on agent readiness against LFM3-Audio-2B's 61 (C), and leads in 2 of 4 scored categories. LFM3-Audio-2B 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 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
- Risk, 50 against 40
- Documentation and upkeep, 58 against 52
Watch for
Z.ai's smallest build is 755.6 GB in FP8, with no local Ollama or LM Studio build
Best for Voice agents on a laptop or phone that need speech in, speech out and tool calls from one small model
Ahead on
- Reach, 80 against 55
- Agent interface, 85 against 70
Watch for
Only llama.cpp and Ollama run it in a release, though the card lists vLLM and SGLang
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 LFM3-Audio-2B +25
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.
LFM3-Audio-2B 80
Memory 30, Liquid's Q4_K_M GGUF is 1.10 GB with its 0.17 GB projector file, and 1.27 GB × 1.2 = 1.5 GB, which fits 8 GB, well inside the 16 GB line. Runtimes 10, Released llama.cpp has the lfm3 architecture with the LFM3 audio projector and speech output (src/models/lfm3.cpp and tools/mtmd at b12242, with a realtime client example that starts this model), and Ollama's library has an lfm3-audio entry. Builds 15, Liquid's GGUF repository holds Q4_0, Q4_K_M, Q8_0, F16 and BF16 files, and Liquid publishes 4-bit and 8-bit MLX builds and an ONNX repository, all in the LiquidAI organisation. Terms 10, the LFM Open License v1.0, a custom licence that lets anyone use it commercially for free below a threshold of $10M annual revenue. Download 10, the Hub API reports gated false for the model and its GGUF, MLX and ONNX repositories on 10 November 2026, so the files download with no account and nothing to accept. Hosted 5, Liquid's own API lists lfm3-audio-2b among its models, so the publisher hosts it. 30 + 10 + 15 + 10 + 10 + 5 = 80.
Agent interface LFM3-Audio-2B +15
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.
LFM3-Audio-2B 85
Chat template 20, chat_template.jinja in the repository (9,328 characters), with roles, audio, tools, deferred tools and tool results. Tool-calling format 25, the card and Liquid's tool-use page document tools passed through tools= in apply_chat_template, calls returned as XML and results sent back as tool messages. Trained tool calling 20, the template loops over every entry in an assistant turn's tool_calls, so several calls fit in one turn, and the card names turning spoken requests into tool calls as one of its four uses. Structured output 5, the card says the model is designed for structured outputs without saying how to ask for JSON. Liquid's API guide documents response_format with lfm3-1.7b as its example. Reasoning control 10, the card documents reasoning per request for text replies: the caller prefills the assistant turn with an open think tag to let the model reason, or a closed one for a direct answer, with a use_thinking example. Context 5, 32K tokens of input and output per the card. 20 + 25 + 20 + 5 + 10 + 5 = 85.
Risk GLM-5.3 +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.
LFM3-Audio-2B 40
File safety 15, safetensors only, no .bin, .pt or .pth files (25). Provenance 15, files in the LiquidAI organisation, which Liquid's docs page for the model and its blog post link to (10). Safety evaluation 0, no safety results on the card or in Liquid's blog post for the LFM3 family, neither of which mentions safety testing. Agent guidance 0, Nothing on prompt injection, an instruction hierarchy, what refusals cover or safeguards to add. Licence risk 10, 15 less 5 for the $10M annual revenue threshold on commercial use. Security programme 0, no way to report a flaw found. 15 + 15 + 0 + 0 + 10 + 0 = 40.
Documentation and upkeep GLM-5.3 +6
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.
LFM3-Audio-2B 52
Model card 17, Intended use (local agents, tool calling, structured outputs, fine-tuning), limitations (not recommended for agentic coding or complex multi-step reasoning, voice chat in English only), an architecture section, parameters (2B), context (32K) and 19 speech languages and locales. Training data 5, the card has no training section. Last change 20, the last commit, on 3 November 2026, changed the card's navigation icons, seven days before this check, and the one before it, on 31 October, edited the card. Responsiveness 0, Neither of the 2 discussions that aren't pull requests (27 and 31 October 2026) has a reply from a LiquidAI member. Version policy 5, LFM3 came out in new repositories and the LFM2.5 models stay in theirs. File health 5, the card gives a 32K context while config.json gives the language model 128,000 positions and Liquid's API lists 128,000 for the hosted model, so the card and the files don't agree on context. 17 + 5 + 20 + 0 + 5 + 5 = 52.
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | GLM-5.3 | LFM3-Audio-2B | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 35%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Reach | 25%25 | 55 | 80 | LFM3-Audio-2B +25 |
| Risk | 20%20 | 50 | 40 | GLM-5.3 +10 |
| Agent interface | 10%10 | 70 | 85 | LFM3-Audio-2B +15 |
| Documentation and upkeep | 10%10 | 58 | 52 | GLM-5.3 +6 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | B 64.6/100 | C 61/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | GLM-5.3 | LFM3-Audio-2B |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Open-weight model | Open-weight model |
| Vendor | Z.ai (Zhipu AI) | Liquid AI |
| 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) | LFM Open License v1.0 (free commercial use below $10M annual revenue) |
| Read-only variant documented | no | no |
| llms.txt | no | yes |
| Last release | 2026-10-15 | 2026-11-03 |
| 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.
LFM3-Audio-2B
A 2B model that listens and speaks on an 8 GB machine, transcribes and translates 19 languages and turns spoken requests into tool calls. Only llama.cpp and Ollama run it in a release. The context is 32K, voice chat is English only, Liquid hasn't answered the repository's questions, and there are no safety results or data sources.
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
LFM3-Audio-2B
- Start it with
llama-server -hf LiquidAI/LFM3-Audio-2B-GGUF:Q4_K_M --jinjaorollama run lfm3-audio - llama.cpp ships examples/realtime_client.py for live speech with this model
- Prefill the assistant turn with an open think tag to let it reason before a text reply
- The context is 32K
- Voice chat is English only, while transcription, synthesis and translation cover 19 languages and locales
- Liquid doesn't recommend it for agentic coding or complex multi-step reasoning
Questions
Which is better for AI agents, GLM-5.3 or LFM3-Audio-2B?
GLM-5.3 scores 64.6 (B) on agent readiness against LFM3-Audio-2B's 61 (C), and leads in 2 of 4 scored categories. LFM3-Audio-2B leads on reach and agent interface.
Other comparisons with GLM-5.3 or LFM3-Audio-2B
- Agents-A1-4B vs GLM-5.3
- Agents-A1-4B vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs GLM-5.3
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs GLM-5.3
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Arete-27B vs GLM-5.3
- Arete-27B vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- BigBang-v1 vs GLM-5.3
- BigBang-v1 vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Carbon-X vs GLM-5.3
- Carbon-X vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs GLM-5.3
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs GLM-5.3
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs GLM-5.3
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs GLM-5.3
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs GLM-5.3
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs GLM-5.3
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs GLM-5.3
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs GLM-5.3
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs GLM-5.3
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs GLM-5.3
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs GLM-5.3
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs GLM-5.3
- GLM-4.5-Air vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs GLM-5.3
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- 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 Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- 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-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 LFM3-Audio-2B
- gpt-oss-20b vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Granite 4.2 30B vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Granite 4.2 3B vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Granite 4.2 8B vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Hy3 vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Inkling-Small vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Inkling vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Kimi K3.1 Pro vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Kimi K3 vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Kolibri-1 vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Kronos vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Laguna M.1 vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Laguna S 2.1 vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- LBS-27B vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- LFM3-1.7B vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs MiniCPM5-2B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs MiniMax-M2.5
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs MiniMax-M2.7
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs MiniMax-M3.1-Flash
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Mistral Large 4
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Nanbeige4.3-33B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Bolt E4B 4GB
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs occamy-1.0
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Ornith-1.5-122B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen-AgentWorld-35B-A3B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen3.5-4B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen3.5-9B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen3.6-27B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen3.8-27B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Recursive Flint
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Ripple-65B Preview
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs SmolLM3-3B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Baidu Unlimited-OCR-2
Machine-readable
- This page as Markdown
/compare/glm-5-3-vs-lfm3-audio-2b.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/glm-5-3.json·/api/v1/tools/lfm3-audio-2b.json - From a terminal
anchor compare glm-5-3 lfm3-audio-2b(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "glm-5-3", "b": "lfm3-audio-2b"}at/mcp, no key