pvakati-tech.ai

// head_to_head

Moondream 3 Preview vs GLM 5.3

Published LiveBench scores across all seven categories, live list pricing, context windows, and the measured cost of a point of capability — for both models, side by side.

OpenRouter + LiveBenchAll comparisonsFull leaderboard

Moondream 3 Preview is the cheaper of the two; neither can be ranked on quality here.

Moondream 3 Preview does not have a published LiveBench run, so this comparison covers price, context and declared capabilities only. A missing score means "not evaluated", not "worse" — the right way to separate these two is an eval on your own workload.

moondream

Moondream 3 Preview

Blended / 1M
$0.850
Context
32K
Released
Oct 15, 2026
Overall score
Not evaluated
reasoningimage input

z-ai

GLM 5.3

Blended / 1M
$1.26
Context
1.0M
Released
Aug 18, 2026
Overall score
60.7
reasoningtool callingprompt caching

Specs and pricing

MetricMoondream 3 PreviewGLM 5.3
LiveBench overall

Mean of the seven LiveBench category scores, 0–100. Higher is better.

—60.7
Cost per point

Measured benchmark spend divided by overall score — dollars per point of capability.

—$1.55
Blended price / 1M

3:1 input:output mix, the usual shape of production traffic.

$0.850win$1.26
Input price / 1M$0.300$0.079win
Output price / 1M$2.50win$4.80
Cached input / 1M

Price of an input token served from the prompt cache, where the provider publishes one.

—$0.078
Context window32K1.0Mwin
Max output tokens4K944Kwin

Benchmarks by category

An overall score averages away the thing you probably care about. These are the seven LiveBench categories scored separately — Moondream 3 Preview on top, GLM 5.3 below, both out of 100.

Coding
—
82.8
Reasoning
—
85.8
Data analysis
—
70.2

What each one costs to run

Per-token prices are hard to feel. These are monthly list costs for both models across five workload shapes, using each provider's published cached-input rate where there is one.

WorkloadMoondream 3 PreviewGLM 5.3
Support chatbot

1.2K in / 400 out × 200K requests

$272.00/mo$402.89/mo
RAG assistant

8K in / 600 out × 100K requests

$390.00/mo$350.80/mo
Coding agent

40K in / 4K out × 20K requests

$440.00/mo$446.64/mo
Document extraction

20K in / 1.5K out × 50K requests

$487.50/mo$438.95/mo
Bulk classification

500 in / 20 out × 5M requests

$1,000/mo$677.00/mo
Run these two through the cost calculator

Which should you pick?

You need to fit large documents in one call

GLM 5.3

Wider context window — 1.0M against 32K.

You are cost-constrained

Moondream 3 Preview

Cheaper on blended list price at $0.850 per million tokens.

Moondream 3 Preview vs GLM 5.3 FAQ

Which is better, Moondream 3 Preview or GLM 5.3?

Moondream 3 Preview is the cheaper of the two; neither can be ranked on quality here. Moondream 3 Preview does not have a published LiveBench run, so this comparison covers price, context and declared capabilities only. A missing score means "not evaluated", not "worse" — the right way to separate these two is an eval on your own workload.

Is Moondream 3 Preview cheaper than GLM 5.3?

Moondream 3 Preview is cheaper. On a 3:1 input:output blend, Moondream 3 Preview lists at $0.850 per million tokens and GLM 5.3 at $1.26 — Moondream 3 Preview is 48% cheaper. Input and output are priced separately — Moondream 3 Preview charges $0.300 in and $2.50 out, GLM 5.3 charges $0.079 and $4.80 — so the model that looks cheaper flips depending on how output-heavy your workload is.

Does Moondream 3 Preview or GLM 5.3 have a bigger context window?

GLM 5.3 has the larger context window: 32K for Moondream 3 Preview against 1.0M for GLM 5.3. Note that a window you can fill is not a window you should fill — retrieval quality usually degrades well before the limit, and you pay for every token you put in it.

Do Moondream 3 Preview and GLM 5.3 support prompt caching?

GLM 5.3 publishes a cached-input rate of $0.078 per million tokens against a full input rate of $0.079. The catalogue lists no separate cached rate for Moondream 3 Preview, which means the provider does not price it separately here — not that caching is unavailable.

Related comparisons

How these numbers are produced

  • Price — provider list price from OpenRouter, refreshed every 15 minutes. “Blended” is a 3:1 input:output mix.
  • Scores — LiveBench release 2026-09-02, using their own category map. Each model shows its strongest published run. A blank means “not evaluated”, never “bad”.
  • Cost per point — the measured dollars LiveBench spent on the run, divided by the score it earned.
  • “Win” — awarded only past a threshold: one full point on a benchmark score, 10% on a price, 25% on a context window. Anything tighter reports as a tie, because effort settings alone move a LiveBench score by more than that.

Published benchmarks rank models on someone else's tasks. Before committing, see LLM & agent evaluation for building an eval on your own.