Tabbit
ResourcesBlogModels
Tabbit LogoTabbit

Tabbit — The AI Browser that Works for You

Topics

  • AI Browser Resources
  • Agentic Browser Resources
  • Browser Downloads and Install Guides
  • Browser Comparisons
  • AI Browser Alternatives
  • Browser Productivity Resources

Popular Guides

  • AI Browser
  • Agentic Browser Download
  • Best AI Browser 2026: Top 9 Tested & Ranked
  • AI Browser Download
  • Free AI Browser
  • Best AI Browser 2026
  • AI Browser Comparison 2026
  • AI Browser for Windows
  • AI Browser for Mac
  • Chrome Alternative 2026

Events

  • Tabbit Skill Competition
  • KPOP SBTI Fandom Personality Test
  • Tabbit Campus Creator Program
  • fifi's Picks: AI Skills for Research Papers
  • User Survey

About

  • Tabbit Blog
  • Press & Media
English
简体中文English
Reviews and evidence

GLM-5.3 · Official source · Vendor report

Z.ai Official Technical Blog: Frontier Coding and Emergent Cybersecurity Capabilities (Z.ai)

The official release supports launch claims and conditional benchmark records, not a universal first-place conclusion.

Unverified: the original source could not be rechecked. Historical figures below are not current verified results.

Official sourceVendor reportEdited 2026-09-20

Test conditions

Test and source boundary
Z.ai release table; harnesses, budgets, reasoning tiers, and task sets differ by project.
Model and version
GLM-5.3; do not merge with GLM-5.2, other models, other reasoning tiers, or other harnesses
Collection date
2026-08-18; the original page was not reopened this round, so dynamic facts remain unverified

Key data and applicable tasks

Core content summary

Z.ai's official positioning: "Scaling post-training is all we did for GLM-5.3." The base model is exactly the same as GLM-5.2; all improvements come from post-training. Behind this are the IndexShare (long context), SAO (long-horizon task RL), and slime (large-scale asynchronous training) technology stack built during the GLM-5.2 period, which has continued to expand over the past month with more environments, more diverse tasks, and more training compute.

Three key release points

  1. Stronger coding capabilities: The official announcement calls GLM-5.3 "the strongest open-weight coding model"; its internal Z.ai Code Bench score is 50% higher than 5.2, while Terminal Bench 3.0 and Agents' Last Exam reach open-source SOTA.

  2. Emergent cybersecurity capabilities: As the scale of post-training grew, cybersecurity capabilities improved beyond expectations. Vulnerability discovery on CyberGym reached SOTA, with more pronounced gains the deeper the model went along the exploit chain (scores on vulnerability-exploitation benchmarks more than doubled).

  3. Open-sourcing: The weights were released about two weeks later, after safety evaluation and hardening were completed.

Official full benchmark table (vendor-reported)

BenchmarkGLM-5.3GLM-5.2Kimi K3DS V4 Pro-0813Qwen3.8-MaxOpus 4.8Fable 5GPT-5.6 Sol
Terminal Bench 2.188.281.088.387.986.685.088.088.8
Terminal Bench 3.028.34.617.4--21.133.734.6
DeepSWE v1.166.946.267.562.756.658.069.772.7
NL2Repo58.048.958.061.155.969.7--
ProgramBench (Almost Solved)19.09.517.5-10.515.533.023.0
FrontierSWE78.167.5---66.588.2-
SWE-Marathon v1.142.519.448.1--48.833.142.5
PostTrainBench39.831.732.0--32.941.836.2
CyberGym84.577.280.083.378.578.183.883.6
ExploitGym (2h/6h)105/13029/3936/70-14/2680/120181/247216/293
ExploitBench54.424.432.2-28.840.078.076.5
Toolathlon Verified73.059.976.574.172.576.274.774.9
AutomationBench v1.0.648.226.246.743.239.841.046.245.8
Agents' Last Exam (ALE-CLI)28.523.827.625.727.025.723.828.6
HLE w/ Tools62.554.759.860.056.257.963.964.5
GDPval-AA v217691508168215901739158817431730

Key training methodology

  • Scaling environments: Training environments shifted from "coding problems" to "complete professional work units"—some tasks are equivalent to several days of work by a senior engineer (for example, an ML infrastructure task involving access to compute clusters, storage, internal documentation, code repositories, and experiment results; diagnosing bottlenecks, implementing optimizations, running experiments, and delivering measurable end-to-end speedups).

  • Automated environment-synthesis pipeline: A research agent collects task patterns from real work and generates runnable long-horizon environments; a review agent verifies that tasks are solvable; and a verifier generates solutions without accessing the reference answer, checking oracle / no-op / unresolved states to produce reliable binary rewards that can be used directly for training.

  • SAO with compaction: The RL strategy from GLM-5.2 continues, ensuring that gains persist on long-horizon tasks.

  • Efficiency data: The Max tier achieves 34.5% @ ~75K tokens versus 23.4% @ ~96K for 5.2; the High tier reaches 31.4% @ ~50K, exceeding Opus 4.8's 29.5% @ ~120K; it still trails Fable 5 (39.5% in the Max tier).

Cybersecurity and disclosure ledger

  • Data: 2,436 vulnerability discoveries / 269 open-source projects / 1,097 critical or high-severity vulnerabilities; the earliest vulnerability was introduced in 1981, with an average "dwell time" of 26.6 years; severity distribution: Critical 107, High 990, Medium 1,286, Low 53.

  • Z.ai security disclosure ledger: https://cvd.z.ai/

  • "capability is growing fastest exactly where we are furthest behind"—capabilities are growing fastest precisely where the gap is largest.

slime framework and engineering details

  • The open-source post-training framework slime (Megatron on the training side, SGLang on the rollout side) uses a single data flow for training, rollout, and data buffering; additions include top-p masking, top-k and full-vocabulary OPD, an R3-style configuration, and training-rollout numerical alignment (the average logprob difference is controlled at around 1e-7, more than 99.99% lower than before); a local-storage caching layer, dynamic teacher-switching prefetch, and joint routing-and-slime scheduling raise end-to-end throughput for long-horizon coding RL by more than 2.3x.

API changes (official)

  • Reasoning is now mandatory: thinking.type supports only enabled; reasoning_effort has three tiers—low/high/max (max by default; max is recommended for coding).

  • Migration: Applications that previously used thinking.type:"disabled" must switch to enabled + reasoning_effort:"low" before changing the model ID, or the request will fail.

  • Example request body: {"model":"glm-5.3","thinking":{"type":"enabled"},"reasoning_effort":"max"}

  • GLM Coding Plan has switched to a credit-quota system; during peak hours (Monday through Friday, 14:00–18:00 UTC+8), external calls consume 50% of the standard credit quota.

  • ZCode: 98%+ cache hit rate (about 30% more effective tokens), a 1.5x limited-time quota bonus (through August 31, up to 180% when stacked), Goal mode, and remote control through WeChat / Feishu.

What this supports

  • The official release supports launch claims and conditional benchmark records, not a universal first-place conclusion. under the stated source conditions only.

What this does not support

  • Does not support combining vendor scores from different projects and harnesses into one leaderboard.

Method, limits, and reproduction

The figures, task set, reasoning tier, and client conditions apply only to the listed source and collection snapshot. Different versions, harnesses, or providers must not be compared directly; undisclosed parameters remain unknown.

For a reproduction, fix the model version, provider or client, reasoning tier, tools, task-set version, sample count, and collection date, and record failures, retries, and human corrections. Full steps are in the source notes below.

Original source

Z.ai official blog (Zhipu International) · Z.ai (official release) · Original publication date 2026-08-14 · Site edit date 2026-09-20

Open original source

GLM-5.3

Compare GLM-5.3 in Tabbit

Download the Tabbit client to check model access

Read the full analysis

Overview · English

GLM-5.3 Explained: What Changed from GLM-5.2

GLM-5.3 keeps the GLM-5.2 base but adds post-training for longer coding and agent tasks. Compare the changes, access paths, costs, and open risks.

Related reviews

GLM-5.3 Review: Advanced Cybersecurity Capabilities and Coding Gains (VentureBeat)Separate cyber, coding, and migration claims in the launch-day report; vendor scores are not independent retests.GLM 5.3 Takes on Kimi K3: Pushing the Same Base Model to Its Limits (Tencent Cloud Developer Community)The article helps locate task differences, but its client conditions cannot become one overall score.X (Twitter) @Ubendev: GLM 5.3 Finds 10 Serious Bugs in Backend Code Written by Claude“Found 10 bugs” is a single workflow result: it supports cross-review as a process, not a detection rate.GLM-5.3 Independent Benchmark: 91.25% on KingBench 3, Taking the Top Spot (MindStudio)A fixed prompt set supplies a bounded outside reference, not repeated retesting.Build staged coding tasks with explicit contextTurn project context, goals, constraints, and acceptance criteria into a staged coding task.Plan before editing in ZCodeIn ZCode, inspect the project and approve a plan before using a small task to verify the edit-and-test loop.Separate API, benchmarks, and weight statusSeparate API, Coding Plan, benchmark conditions, and weight status instead of presenting an open-weight promise as a download.Watch cache and context use in ZCodeUse ZCode cache-hit and context breakdown signals to watch quota use before continuing a long coding task.