SmophyAI

Published daily · Next update 02:00 UTC

Real data comparison

Z.ai: GLM 5.3 Flash (batch) vs inclusionAI: Ling 3.0 Flash

On quality, Z.ai: GLM 5.3 Flash (batch) leads (41.8 vs 20.6). On price, inclusionAI: Ling 3.0 Flash is cheaper ($0.03 vs $0.24 per 1M). In real production usage, Z.ai: GLM 5.3 Flash (batch) is used more (rank #5 vs #15 of 353).

  • Z.ai: GLM 5.3 Flash (batch)
  • inclusionAI: Ling 3.0 Flash
Quality (Intelligence Index)41.8 / 20.6
Price ($/1M blended)$0.24 / $0.03
Average usage share10.60% / 2.05%
Coding index71.5 / 50.6
Agentic index50.9 / 21
Context window1,310,720 / 262,144
Quality per dollar176.0 pts/$ / 654.0 pts/$

Usage share over time

22.61%16.96%11.31%5.65%0.00%Share of usageJul 24Sep 1Sep 22
  • Z.ai: GLM 5.3 Flash (batch)
  • inclusionAI: Ling 3.0 Flash

Frequently asked questions

Z.ai: GLM 5.3 Flash (batch) vs inclusionAI: Ling 3.0 Flash: which is better quality?

Z.ai: GLM 5.3 Flash (batch) scores higher on Artificial Analysis's Intelligence Index (41.8 vs 20.6).

Z.ai: GLM 5.3 Flash (batch) vs inclusionAI: Ling 3.0 Flash: which is cheaper?

inclusionAI: Ling 3.0 Flash is cheaper at $0.03/1M vs $0.24/1M.

Z.ai: GLM 5.3 Flash (batch) vs inclusionAI: Ling 3.0 Flash: which is used more?

Z.ai: GLM 5.3 Flash (batch) has higher real OpenRouter usage share (rank #5 vs #15 of 353).

Source: OpenRouter (openrouter.ai/rankings), as of September 23, 2026.

Benchmark scores: Artificial Analysis (artificialanalysis.ai) via OpenRouter (openrouter.ai/rankings).

Methodology: www.smophy.ai/benchmark/methodology

Token counts originate from each provider's own tokenizer and are not directly comparable across providers.