Compare / Particle-1 vs GLM-5.3 FlashX Legal
Particle-1 vs GLM-5.3 FlashX Legal
Which is cheaper, which is more capable, and which does better at each kind of work, from 78 results on 4 sources that measured both models.
Particle AIParticle-1
Particle-1 wins 5412 too close to callGLM-5.3 FlashX Legal wins 12
Of the 78 results both models have, the better value on each. Results whose reported ranges overlap are too close to call.
Results as of 5 November 2026 (catalogue release 2026-11-05-44c5fb63d296).
Particle-1 or GLM-5.3 FlashX Legal? The short answer
They score about the same, so pick Particle-1: it costs 4.3 times less per product listing on CatalogBench.
- Spring Prompt overall: Particle-1 33, GLM-5.3 FlashX Legal 34 (out of 100; how the score works).
- Particle-1 is cheaper to run: $0.001 against $0.005 per product listing on CatalogBench (4.3 times less).
- On our own benchmarks, on the results both models have: Particle-1 does better for decks from an analysis; GLM-5.3 FlashX Legal for marketing planning.
Head to head
33
Spring Prompt overall
34
$0.16
Price per million tokens, blendedlower is better
$0.59
1,048,576
Context window, tokens
1,048,576
Every fact side by side
| Particle-1 | GLM-5.3 FlashX Legal | |
|---|---|---|
| Price per million tokens | $0.050 in · $0.50 out | $0.37 in · $1.25 out |
| Blended (3 in : 1 out) | $0.16 | $0.59 |
| Cheapest host, blended | – | – |
| Cost per product listing (CatalogBench) | $0.001 | $0.005 |
| Intelligence Index | – | – |
| Spring Prompt overall | 33 | 34 |
| Output speed, tokens a second | – | – |
| Context window | 1,048,576 tokens | 1,048,576 tokens |
| Released | – | – |
| Weights | Closed | Closed |
| Developer based in | – | China |
Prices are the developer's list price where we have read it, otherwise the typical host on OpenRouter; see every model's price. Intelligence and speed from Artificial Analysis.
Which is better for what
Each model's rank among the models on sale today, for each kind of work, from our own benchmarks and licensed sources. Further right is better; the better rank is in green.
Product listingsTurning a sparse product feed and photos into listings that can go live
26 of 27
26 of 27
Decks from an analysisTurning a finished analysis into a deck you could present as it is
15 of 28
21 of 28
User surveysPlanning a user survey and reading its results without being misled
7 of 17
8 of 17
Marketing planningPlanning a year of ad spend without overspending
14 of 28
11 of 28
Speed under pressureGood decisions against a real clock (fast chess)
32 of 32
17 of 31
Every shared result
Each model's best result on every measure both have, grouped by benchmark, with the setting that produced it. Under each measure, every model that benchmark has measured is a grey tick, best to the right, so you can see where the two sit in the field. The headline measures of each benchmark come first; the rest are under "Show all". Green marks the better value; where a source reports ranges that overlap, neither is marked.
| Measure | Particle-1 | GLM-5.3 FlashX Legal |
|---|---|---|
| CatalogBench measured by Spring Prompt · 3 results | ||
| Cost per productUS dollars, lower is better 3 · 9 of 28 measured | $0.0012 | $0.0050 |
| Reliably publish-ready% of products, higher is better 26 · 26 of 27 measured | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| Reliably publish-ready · sales brief% of products, higher is better 22 · 22 of 27 measured | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| DeckBench measured by Spring Prompt · 3 results | ||
| Cost per deckUS dollars, lower is better 2 · 9 of 28 measured | $0.0086 | $0.0359 |
| Deck ratingrating, higher is betterThe rating weighs each win by how strong the other deck was; the win rate counts wins against whichever decks a model happened to meet, so the two can disagree. 15 · 21 of 28 measured | 1,163 | 820 |
| Accurate decks% of tasks, higher is better 19 · 23 of 28 measured | 16.7% | 0.0% |
| ROASBench measured by Spring Prompt · 3 results | ||
| Overall scorescore out of 100, higher is better 14 · 11 of 28 measured | 43.3 | 46.2 |
| Audience scorescore out of 100, higher is better 13 · 14 of 28 measured | 65.1 | 63.2 |
| Business scorescore out of 100, higher is better 13 · 10 of 28 measured | 39.0 | 44.9 |
| SurveyBench measured by Spring Prompt · 3 results | ||
| Analysis ratingrating, higher is betterThe rating weighs each win by how strong the other analysis was; the win rate counts wins against whichever analyses a model happened to meet, so the two can disagree. 7 · 8 of 17 measured | 1,193 | 997 |
| Cost per taskUS dollars, lower is better 1 · 9 of 17 measured | $0.0140 | $0.0693 |
| Analysis scorepoints of 100, higher is better 6 · 14 of 17 measured | 88.4 | 53.4 |
Show all 78 results (66 more)
| Measure | Particle-1 | GLM-5.3 FlashX Legal |
|---|---|---|
| CatalogBench measured by Spring Prompt · 27 results | ||
| Channel compliance% of products, higher is better 1 · 1 of 28 measured | 100.0% | 100.0% |
| Channel rules broken% of products, lower is better 15 · 1 of 28 measured | 0.6% | 0.0% |
| Channel rules broken · sales brief% of products, lower is better 14 · 27 of 28 measured | 0.6% | 3.6% |
| Conflicts caught% of conflicts, higher is better 1 · 1 of 28 measured | 100.0% | 100.0% |
| Content quality% of checks, higher is better 13 · 20 of 28 measured | 97.1% | 96.2% |
| Content quality · sales brief% of checks, higher is better 19 · 21 of 28 measured | 96.1% | 95.4% |
| Decision accuracy% of decisions, higher is better 13 · 21 of 28 measured | 96.8% | 95.1% |
| Failed outputs% of products, lower is better 1 · 25 of 28 measured | 0.0% | 0.6% |
| Failed outputs · sales brief% of products, lower is better 1 · 24 of 28 measured | 0.0% | 1.2% |
| Field accuracy% of missing fields, higher is better 13 · 11 of 28 measured | 93.7% | 94.2% |
| Invented values% of filled values, lower is better 14 · 20 of 28 measured | 1.7% | 2.2% |
| Missing UK information% of products, lower is better 1 · 1 of 28 measured | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| Missing UK information · sales brief% of products, lower is better 1 · 1 of 28 measured | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| Not findable% of products, lower is better 1 · 1 of 28 measured | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| Not findable · sales brief% of products, lower is better 1 · 1 of 28 measured | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| Output tokens per producttokens, lower is better 3 · 5 of 6 measured | 2,180 | 3,651 |
| Publish-ready listings% of products, higher is better 27 · 27 of 28 measured | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| Publish-ready listings · sales brief% of products, higher is better 26 · 26 of 28 measured | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| Time per productseconds, lower is better 20 · 22 of 28 measured | 23.5 | 29.4 |
| Unsupported claimsclaims per product, lower is better 16 · 22 of 28 measured | 0.71 | 1.19 |
| Unsupported claims% of products, lower is better 15 · 18 of 28 measured | 19.6% | 27.4% |
| Unsupported claims · sales brief% of products, lower is better 12 · 21 of 28 measured | 49.4% | 79.8% |
| Unsupported claims · sales briefclaims per product, lower is better 17 · 25 of 28 measured | 2.36 | 3.94 |
| Wrong attributes% of products, lower is better 19 · 12 of 28 measured | 19.6% | 16.7% |
| Wrong attributes · sales brief% of products, lower is better 14 · 25 of 28 measured | 17.9% | 23.2% |
| Wrong category or variant% of products, lower is better 5 · 25 of 28 measured | 1.8% | 5.4% |
| Wrong category or variant · sales brief% of products, lower is better 5 · 18 of 28 measured | 1.8% | 3.0% |
| DeckBench measured by Spring Prompt · 15 results | ||
| Caveat dropped% of tasks, lower is better 1 · 28 of 28 measured | 0.0% | 50.0% |
| Clean layout% of tasks, higher is better 22 · 15 of 28 measured | 16.7% | 33.3% |
| Design quality% of the maximum, higher is better 22 · 28 of 28 measured | 54.4% | 29.3% |
| Draft figure quoted% of tasks, lower is better 21 · 28 of 28 measured | 50.0% | 83.3% |
| Findings missing% of tasks, lower is better 1 · 28 of 28 measured | 0.0% | 50.0% |
| Head-to-head win rate% of comparisons, higher is betterThe rating weighs each win by how strong the other deck was; the win rate counts wins against whichever decks a model happened to meet, so the two can disagree. 15 · 18 of 28 measured | 51.7% | 47.5% |
| Layout defects% of tasks, lower is better 22 · 15 of 28 measured | 83.3% | 66.7% |
| Misleading metric used% of tasks, lower is better 1 · 28 of 28 measured | 0.0% | 50.0% |
| Output tokens per decktokens, lower is better 2 · 4 of 7 measured | 16,952 | 27,796 |
| Presentable decks% of tasks, higher is better 13 · 13 of 28 measured | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| Recommendation late or wrong% of tasks, lower is better 16 · 25 of 28 measured | 33.3% | 83.3% |
| Slides needing work% of tasks, lower is better 8 · 20 of 28 measured | 33.3% | 66.7% |
| Time per deckseconds, lower is better 17 · 20 of 28 measured | 154 | 175 |
| Unsupported claims% of tasks, lower is better 1 · 27 of 28 measured | 0.0% | 66.7% |
| Unsupported numbers% of tasks, lower is better 1 · 28 of 28 measured | 0.0% | 50.0% |
| ROASBench measured by Spring Prompt · 6 results | ||
| Consistency scorescore out of 100, higher is better 15 · 12 of 28 measured | 27.8 | 29.0 |
| Contribution profitsimulated US dollars, higher is better 9 · 7 of 28 measured | $684,624 | $695,680 |
| Cost of a runUS dollars, lower is better 3 · 13 of 28 measured | $0.0234 | $0.16 |
| Months over budgetmonths of 12, lower is better 1 · 25 of 28 measured | 0 | 1 |
| Planning scorescore out of 100, higher is better 25 · 10 of 28 measured | 54.3 | 54.9 |
| Return on ad spendprofit per $1 spent, higher is better 13 · 10 of 28 measured | $0.51 | $0.55 |
| SurveyBench measured by Spring Prompt · 18 results | ||
| Head-to-head win rate% of comparisons, higher is betterThe rating weighs each win by how strong the other analysis was; the win rate counts wins against whichever analyses a model happened to meet, so the two can disagree. 8 · 5 of 17 measured | 50.0% | 62.8% |
| Leading or double-barrelled questions% of tasks, lower is better 3 · 9 of 17 measured | 11.1% | 44.4% |
| Mistaken next steps% of tasks, lower is better 6 · 11 of 17 measured | 22.2% | 44.4% |
| Numbers right% of answers, higher is better 1 · 13 of 17 measured | 100.0% | 94.9% |
| Objectives unanswerable% of tasks, lower is better 8 · 14 of 17 measured | 11.1% | 22.2% |
| Output tokens per tasktokens, lower is better 2 · 4 of 7 measured | 26,601 | 51,553 |
| Precision ignored% of tasks, lower is better 1 · 10 of 17 measured | 0.0% | 22.2% |
| Research scorepoints of 100, higher is better 7 · 13 of 17 measured | 89.7 | 59.2 |
| Sound research% of tasks, higher is better 6 · 7 of 17 measured | 22.2% | 11.1% |
| Stakeholder's view presumed% of tasks, lower is better 1 · 10 of 17 measured | 0.0% | 22.2% |
| Survey plan scorepoints of 100, higher is better 6 · 15 of 17 measured | 92.6 | 72.7 |
| Survey structure% of tasks, lower is better 12 · 15 of 17 measured | 33.3% | 44.4% |
| Time per taskseconds, lower is better 13 · 15 of 17 measured | 252 | 435 |
| Traps handled% of traps, higher is better 2 · 10 of 17 measured | 95.7% | 83.0% |
| Traps missed% of tasks, lower is better 3 · 8 of 17 measured | 33.3% | 66.7% |
| Unsupported findings% of tasks, lower is better 7 · 9 of 17 measured | 55.6% | 77.8% |
| Wrong numbers% of tasks, lower is better 1 · 10 of 17 measured | 0.0% | 33.3% |
| Wrong recommendation% of tasks, lower is better 3 · 14 of 17 measured | 11.1% | 55.6% |
Compare them with other models
- Particle-1 vs Claude Haiku 5.5Highest-scoring overall at under $0.25 per million tokens
- Particle-1 vs Claude Opus 5.5Highest-scoring overall available today
- Particle-1 vs Mistral Large 4Just below overall
- GLM-5.3 FlashX Legal vs Claude Opus 5.5Highest-scoring overall available today
- GLM-5.3 FlashX Legal vs GLM-5.3Just above overall
Quick answers
Is Particle-1 better than GLM-5.3 FlashX Legal?
They score about the same, so pick Particle-1: it costs 4.3 times less per product listing on CatalogBench.
Which is cheaper, Particle-1 or GLM-5.3 FlashX Legal?
Particle-1 is cheaper to run: $0.001 against $0.005 per product listing on CatalogBench (4.3 times less).
Which is better for decks from an analysis, Particle-1 or GLM-5.3 FlashX Legal?
Particle-1 ranks 15 of 28 models on sale for turning a finished analysis into a deck you could present as it is, against 21 for GLM-5.3 FlashX Legal.
Which is better for user surveys, Particle-1 or GLM-5.3 FlashX Legal?
Particle-1 ranks 7 of 17 models on sale for planning a user survey and reading its results without being misled, against 8 for GLM-5.3 FlashX Legal.
Which is better for marketing planning, Particle-1 or GLM-5.3 FlashX Legal?
GLM-5.3 FlashX Legal ranks 11 of 28 models on sale for planning a year of ad spend without overspending, against 14 for Particle-1.
Which is better for speed under pressure, Particle-1 or GLM-5.3 FlashX Legal?
GLM-5.3 FlashX Legal ranks 17 of 32 models on sale for good decisions against a real clock (fast chess), against 32 for Particle-1.
Run Particle-1 and GLM-5.3 FlashX Legal on your own prompt
Benchmarks aren't your data. Try both side by side in the playground, with the cost of every answer.