Skip to content
Rival
How it worksPrivacyTerms
Explore all of Rival

Explore

  • Compare Models
  • All Models
  • Image Comparison
  • Audio Comparison
  • Image Generation
  • Best AI For...
  • Arena
  • API Pricing
  • Challenges

Discover

  • SubjectiveBench
  • Default Index
  • Research
  • Research downloads
  • Rival Kits
  • Find your AI taste
  • UI Glow-Up
  • VoiceLock
  • Cost Cutter
  • Agent skills
  • Benchmarks vs Vibes
  • Brief
  • Jailbreak
  • Model Updates
  • Provider Status
  • AI Creators

Connect

  • Methodology
  • Advertise
  • Partnerships
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms
  • RSS Feed
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Compare
  4. /
  5. DeepSeek R1 0528vsGLM 5.3
Updated Aug 2026

DeepSeek R1 0528vsGLM 5.3

DeepSeek R1 0528 is cheaper than GLM 5.3 at $0/M vs $0.6538/M input tokens.

DeepSeek R1 0528 and GLM 5.3 compared across 13 shared prompts
SpecDeepSeek R1 0528GLM 5.3
Input priceFree$0.6538/M tokens
Output priceFree$2.0548/M tokens
Context window164K tokens1.3M tokens
WeightsOpenOpen
Free API (OpenRouter)NoNo
ReleasedMay 2025Aug 2026
Side by side

Same prompt, both answers

Opening lines from 4 of the 13 prompts both answered. Formatting stripped, words untouched.

Ethical Dilemma with Stakeholders

You're the CEO of a pharmaceutical company. Your best-selling drug ($2B annual revenue, used by 4 million patients for chronic pain) has…

DeepSeek R1 0528478 words
Here's a concrete, hour-by-hour action plan prioritizing patient safety, legal compliance, and long-term stakeholder trust, while managing immediate financial and reputational risks: Core Principle: Patient safety and regulatory compliance are non-negotiable.
Read the full answer
GLM 5.31,143 words
The Core Decision (Made Before Hour 1) The side effect is real, serious, and known to me now. Patients are currently taking this drug without informed consent about a ~1-in-8,000 liver failure risk. Everything else — stock price, board pressure, legal exposure — is secondary.
Read the full answer

Historical Counterfactual Analysis

If the transistor had been invented in 1920 instead of 1947, trace the likely technological, economic, and geopolitical implications through…

DeepSeek R1 05281,203 words
The invention of the transistor in 1920, rather than 1947, would have fundamentally reshaped the 20th century, creating a technological acceleration of roughly 25-30 years by 1980. Here’s a detailed analysis of the implications: I.
Read the full answer
GLM 5.31,346 words
If the Transistor Had Arrived in 1920 The Premise: Why 1920 Was Nearly Impossible Before tracing effects, note the counterfactual requires heroic assumptions. The transistor depended on quantum mechanics (solid-state band theory, ~1928-1933), ultrapure semiconductor materials (zone refining, 1950s), and wartime radar…
Read the full answer

Explain Like I'm a Specific Expert

Explain how a large language model (like GPT or Claude) learns and generates text to each of these three audiences: 1. **An experienced…

DeepSeek R1 0528848 words
Here's how to explain LLM learning and generation to each audience, tailored to their perspective: For the Experienced Software Engineer (Skeptical about "Next Word Prediction") Focus: Systems analogy, emergent complexity, pattern recognition as understanding.
Read the full answer
GLM 5.31,164 words
The Software Engineer You've probably written autocomplete logic before, so you're right to be skeptical of the naive version: a Markov chain that looks up "what usually comes after 'the'" is trivially dumb.
Read the full answer

Startup Pitch Teardown

Here's a pitch deck summary for a startup called "MindMeld AI": **Slide 1 - Vision:** "We're building the future of human-AI collaboration.…

DeepSeek R1 0528657 words
Here are the 3 weakest claims in the MindMeld AI pitch deck, why they are weak, and how to strengthen them: Weak Claim (Slide 3): "Our proprietary EEG headband uses advanced ML to decode neural patterns into text with 94% accuracy. Works with any language, any device."
Read the full answer
GLM 5.3585 words
3 Weakest Claims in the MindMeld AI Pitch "Reads your brainwaves to predict what you want to type before you think it" Why it's weak: This claim is neurologically incoherent. EEG sensors detect electrical activity on the scalp after neural firing occurs — you cannot decode intent "before" the brain generates it.
Read the full answer
Our Verdict
DeepSeek R1 0528
DeepSeek R1 0528
GLM 5.3
GLM 5.3

Not enough votes to call it. On the specs, nothing separates them.

Too close to call
API pricing

Cost per 1M tokens

DeepSeek R1 0528
Input
$0.000
Output
$0.000
GLM 5.3
Input
$0.65
Output
$2.05
Where to run it

34 hosts, cheapest first

DeepSeek R1 05284 hosts
HostInOutContextUptime
DDeepInfrafp4$0.50 in·$2.15 out·164k·100% upSSiliconFlowfp8$0.50 in·$2.18 out·164k·99.3% upSStreamLake$0.57 in·$2.29 out·128k·99.4% upNNovitafp8$0.70 in·$2.50 out·164k·99.9% up
GLM 5.330 hosts
HostInOutContextUptime
DDeepInfrafp4$0.56 in·$2.50 out·1M·97.1% upMMorph$0.71 in·$2.24 out·1M·99.7% upRRekafp8$0.76 in·$2.57 out·262k·99.4% upSSail Researchfp8$0.77 in·$4.00 out·1M·99.8% upNNovitafp8$0.78 in·$2.46 out·1M·99.9% upIio.netfp8$0.82 in·$2.77 out·262k·99.8% up
24 more hostsFewer hosts
PPhala$0.84 in·$2.64 out·1M·99.4% upIInferenceNetfp4$0.90 in·$3.00 out·1M·98.2% upDDigitalOcean$0.91 in·$2.86 out·1M·99.7% upGGMI Cloudfp8$0.98 in·$3.08 out·1M·99.5% upIInceptronfp4$1.03 in·$3.73 out·1M·99.4% upMMakorafp4$1.05 in·$4.20 out·980k·97.1% upSSiliconFlowfp8$1.12 in·$3.52 out·1M·99.8% upDDecartfp4$1.19 in·$3.74 out·1M·99.2% upFFriendli$1.26 in·$3.96 out·1M·100% upAAkashMLfp8$1.30 in·$4.40 out·1M·100% upAAtlasCloudfp8$1.40 in·$4.40 out·1M·99.4% upBaidu Qianfanfp8$1.40 in·$4.40 out·1M·99.8% upBBasetenfp4$1.40 in·$4.40 out·1M·99.8% upCloudflare Workers AI$1.40 in·$4.40 out·1.3M·98.9% upCCrusoefp4$1.40 in·$4.40 out·1M·98.9% upFFireworks$1.40 in·$4.40 out·1M·99.5% upMistralnvfp4$1.40 in·$4.40 out·1M·99.4% upModal$1.40 in·$4.40 out·1M·99.1% upPParasailfp8$1.40 in·$4.40 out·1M·99.2% upTTogether$1.40 in·$4.40 out·1M·98.1% upVVenice$1.40 in·$4.40 out·1M·98.5% upWWafer$1.40 in·$4.40 out·1M·99.9% upZ.aifp8$1.40 in·$4.40 out·1M·99.9% upAlibaba Clouddegraded$1.19 in·$3.74 out·1M·99.5% up

Per million tokens. Prices and uptime via OpenRouter, checked 23 Sep 2026.

Research

What we learned reading every model

FAQ

Common questions

DeepSeek R1 0528 is developed by DeepSeek while GLM 5.3 is developed by Zhipu AI. DeepSeek R1 0528 has a 164K token context window vs GLM 5.3's 1.3M. You can compare their actual outputs across 13 challenges on Rival to see how they differ in practice.

It depends on your use case. DeepSeek R1 0528 and GLM 5.3 each have strengths in different areas. Rival lets you compare their real outputs side-by-side across 13 challenges so you can judge which fits your needs best.

DeepSeek R1 0528 costs $0/M input tokens and GLM 5.3 costs $0.6538/M input tokens. DeepSeek R1 0528 is $0.65/M cheaper per input. Check their side-by-side outputs on Rival to see if the price difference is justified by quality.

This page shows a side-by-side comparison of DeepSeek R1 0528 and GLM 5.3 across shared challenges. You can vote on which model produced the better output in a blind duel. Browsing and voting are free. No account is needed to look; signing in only saves your votes and likes.

Keep exploring

More comparisons

Against the newest arrivals

DeepSeek R1 0528 logoDeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp logo
DeepSeek R1 0528 vs DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision ExpLanded Sep 2026
GLM 5.3 logoSolar Pro 4 logo
GLM 5.3 vs Solar Pro 4Landed Sep 2026
DeepSeek R1 0528 logoHy3 logo
DeepSeek R1 0528 vs Hy3Landed Sep 2026
GLM 5.3 logoQwen3.7 Flash logo
GLM 5.3 vs Qwen3.7 FlashLanded Sep 2026
DeepSeek R1 0528 logoLing 3.0 Flash logo
DeepSeek R1 0528 vs Ling 3.0 FlashLanded Sep 2026
GLM 5.3 logoMuse Glimmer 30B logo
GLM 5.3 vs Muse Glimmer 30BLanded Sep 2026
DeepSeek R1 0528 logoTernary Bonsai 2 27B logo
DeepSeek R1 0528 vs Ternary Bonsai 2 27BLanded Sep 2026
GLM 5.3 logoGLM 5.3 Flash logo
GLM 5.3 vs GLM 5.3 FlashLanded Sep 2026

Same lab, same size, long tail

DeepSeek R1 0528 logoDeepSeek V4.1 Flash logo
DeepSeek R1 0528 vs DeepSeek V4.1 FlashSame lab
DeepSeek R1 0528 logoDeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 logo
DeepSeek R1 0528 vs DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813Same lab
GLM 5.3 logoGLM 5.3 FlashX logo
GLM 5.3 vs GLM 5.3 FlashXSame lab
GLM 5.3 logoGLM 5.2 logo
GLM 5.3 vs GLM 5.2Same lab
DeepSeek R1 0528 logoGemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview logo
DeepSeek R1 0528 vs Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite PreviewNew provider
DeepSeek R1 0528 logoGemini 3.1 Pro Preview logo
DeepSeek R1 0528 vs Gemini 3.1 Pro PreviewSame size
DeepSeek R1 0528 logoGemini 3.5 Flash logo
DeepSeek R1 0528 vs Gemini 3.5 FlashNew provider
DeepSeek R1 0528 logoGemini 3.6 Flash logo
DeepSeek R1 0528 vs Gemini 3.6 FlashNew provider

Model pages

DeepSeek R1 0528 logo
DeepSeek R1 052858 outputs, specs and price
GLM 5.3 logo
GLM 5.313 outputs, specs and price
Rival
How it worksPrivacyTerms
Explore all of Rival

Explore

  • Compare Models
  • All Models
  • Image Comparison
  • Audio Comparison
  • Image Generation
  • Best AI For...
  • Arena
  • API Pricing
  • Challenges

Discover

  • SubjectiveBench
  • Default Index
  • Research
  • Research downloads
  • Rival Kits
  • Find your AI taste
  • UI Glow-Up
  • VoiceLock
  • Cost Cutter
  • Agent skills
  • Benchmarks vs Vibes
  • Brief
  • Jailbreak
  • Model Updates
  • Provider Status
  • AI Creators

Connect

  • Methodology
  • Advertise
  • Partnerships
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms
  • RSS Feed