GLM 5.1 vs Nanbeige4.3-33B
Z.ai · China | Nanbeige LLM Lab (BOSS Zhipin) · China · Updated June 2026
Quick verdict
Pick GLM 5.1 for long-horizon autonomous agentic engineering (up to 8-hour runs) or state-of-the-art open-weight coding (topped swe-bench pro at launch). Pick Nanbeige4.3-33B for 33b dense open-weight model under apache 2.0 with a 524,288-token context or artificial analysis intelligence index of 20, first of the 8 models in its comparison class. On a tight budget at scale, Nanbeige4.3-33B is the value pick.
GLM 5.1 (Z.ai) and Nanbeige4.3-33B (Nanbeige LLM Lab (BOSS Zhipin)) are two of the models people most often weigh against each other in 2026. GLM 5.1 is an open-weight (MIT) Chinese coding model built for long-horizon agentic engineering, topping SWE-Bench Pro at launch while running autonomously for up to 8 hours. Nanbeige4.3-33B is nanbeige LLM Lab's October 25, 2026 Apache 2.0 open model - 33B parameters and 512K context, aimed at agentic coding on modest hardware. They diverge most on price and context window — each quantified below from the models' real specs.
Key differences at a glance
- ▸Context window: Nanbeige4.3-33B holds 2.6× more — 512K tokens (~786 pages) vs 200K (~300 pages). But effective recall usually fades long before the advertised ceiling, so the bigger number only helps if the model reasons over it.
- ▸Recency: Nanbeige4.3-33B is the newer model by about 7 months (released October 25, 2026), usually meaning fresher training data and capabilities.
Side-by-side specs
| Spec | GLM 5.1 | Nanbeige4.3-33B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (China) | Nanbeige LLM Lab (BOSS Zhipin) (China) |
| Released | April 7, 2026 | October 25, 2026 |
| Context window | 200K (~300 pages) | 512K tokens (~786 pages) |
| Price (in/out) | $1.4/$4.4 per 1M tokens | Open weight (self-host / free) |
| Open weight? | Yes — self-hostable | Yes — self-hostable |
| Modalities | text, code | text, code |
| SWE-Bench Verified | Not published | Not published |
| MRCR v2 @ 1M | Not published | Not published |
Who wins what
Long-horizon autonomous agentic engineering (up to 8-hour runs)
GLM 5.1
GLM 5.1 lists long-horizon autonomous agentic engineering (up to 8-hour runs) among its strengths; Nanbeige4.3-33B does not.
State-of-the-art open-weight coding (topped SWE-Bench Pro at launch)
GLM 5.1
Nanbeige4.3-33B is comparatively weak here — coding benchmarks are self-reported, with non-standard settings noted on the model card and no independent reproduction
Sustained tool use across thousands of calls
GLM 5.1
GLM 5.1 lists sustained tool use across thousands of calls among its strengths; Nanbeige4.3-33B does not.
33B dense open-weight model under Apache 2.0 with a 524,288-token context
Nanbeige4.3-33B
Its 512K tokens window holds about 2.6× more than GLM 5.1's 200K in a single prompt.
Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index of 20, first of the 8 models in its comparison class
Nanbeige4.3-33B
Nanbeige LLM Lab's October 25, 2026 Apache 2.0 open model - 33B parameters and 512K context, aimed at agentic coding on modest hardware — and it carries the larger 512K tokens context.
Lab-reported Terminal-Bench 2.1 of 80.9 and DeepSWE of 65.5
Nanbeige4.3-33B
Nanbeige LLM Lab's October 25, 2026 Apache 2.0 open model - 33B parameters and 512K context, aimed at agentic coding on modest hardware — and it is the newer of the two.
Lowest cost at scale
Nanbeige4.3-33B
Its weights are open, so at volume you pay for your own hardware instead of GLM 5.1's $1.4/$4.4 per 1M tokens.
Largest single-prompt input
Nanbeige4.3-33B
Its 512K tokens window is about 2.6× larger than GLM 5.1's 200K, fitting roughly 786 pages in one prompt.
Which should you pick?
A cost-sensitive startup shipping high volume
→ Nanbeige4.3-33B
At Open weight (self-host / free) it undercuts GLM 5.1, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.
Someone analysing very long documents or codebases
→ Nanbeige4.3-33B
Larger 512K tokens window fits more in one prompt.
Anyone whose priority is long-horizon autonomous agentic engineering (up to 8-hour runs)
→ GLM 5.1
It is specifically built for that.
Anyone whose priority is 33b dense open-weight model under apache 2.0 with a 524,288-token context
→ Nanbeige4.3-33B
That is its strongest area.
GLM 5.1: where it fits
An open-weight (MIT) Chinese coding model built for long-horizon agentic engineering, topping SWE-Bench Pro at launch while running autonomously for up to 8 hours. Released April 7, 2026 by Z.ai, it is built for long-horizon autonomous agentic engineering (up to 8-hour runs), state-of-the-art open-weight coding (topped SWE-Bench Pro at launch), sustained tool use across thousands of calls, and self-hostable under a permissive MIT license.
Its trade-offs are real: text-only, with no image, audio, or video input, and 754B-parameter MoE demands heavy GPU resources to self-host. At $1.4 in / $4.4 out per million tokens, it sits in the mid price band.
Nanbeige4.3-33B: where it fits
Nanbeige LLM Lab's October 25, 2026 Apache 2.0 open model - 33B parameters and 512K context, aimed at agentic coding on modest hardware. Released October 25, 2026 by Nanbeige LLM Lab (BOSS Zhipin), it is built for 33B dense open-weight model under Apache 2.0 with a 524,288-token context, artificial Analysis Intelligence Index of 20, first of the 8 models in its comparison class, and lab-reported Terminal-Bench 2.1 of 80.9 and DeepSWE of 65.5.
Its trade-offs: coding benchmarks are self-reported, with non-standard settings noted on the model card and no independent reproduction, no public first-party API or per-token price; Artificial Analysis lists no publicly available API, and text-only input. As an open-weight model, its running cost is your own hardware rather than a per-token fee.
The bottom line for this matchup
GLM 5.1 and Nanbeige4.3-33B overlap enough that the right pick depends on your specific job. Nanbeige4.3-33B costs less per token; Nanbeige4.3-33B holds the larger context; and each leads in its own area — GLM 5.1 for long-horizon autonomous agentic engineering (up to 8-hour runs), Nanbeige4.3-33B for 33b dense open-weight model under apache 2.0 with a 524,288-token context. Rather than crowning one, run the same hard task through both once and let the results decide.
Want both GLM 5.1 and Nanbeige4.3-33B without two subscriptions? LumiChats gives you these plus 40+ models under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day) — draft with one, cross-check with the other.
See pricingFrequently asked questions
Is GLM 5.1 or Nanbeige4.3-33B better for coding?
Public SWE-Bench figures are not available for either model, so the honest test is your own repository — run an identical real bug through both. By design, GLM 5.1 leans toward long-horizon autonomous agentic engineering (up to 8-hour runs) while Nanbeige4.3-33B leans toward 33b dense open-weight model under apache 2.0 with a 524,288-token context, and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.
Which is cheaper, GLM 5.1 or Nanbeige4.3-33B?
Nanbeige4.3-33B is cheaper — $1.4/$4.4 per 1M tokens vs Open weight (self-host / free).
Which has the bigger context window?
Nanbeige4.3-33B — 512K tokens vs 200K, about 2.6× larger. Useful only if the model actually reasons over the full window, which not all do.
Can I use both GLM 5.1 and Nanbeige4.3-33B together?
Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you GLM 5.1, Nanbeige4.3-33B and 40+ others under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day), so you can draft with one and cross-check with the other instead of buying two subscriptions.
Which is newer, GLM 5.1 or Nanbeige4.3-33B?
Nanbeige4.3-33B — released October 25, 2026, about 7 months after GLM 5.1.
Related comparisons
Specifications and benchmarks reflect publicly reported figures as of June 2026 and may change as providers release updates. Always verify on your own workload.