Model Comparison
GPT-6 Astra vs GLM-5.3 Flash
Too close to call: the best configurations, GPT-6 Astra (max) and GLM-5.3 Flash (max), are 45 Elo apart, and their 95% ranges overlap. Among 78 models, each ranked by its best configuration, GPT-6 Astra is #11 and GLM-5.3 Flash is #12. Cost per script: $1.15 for GPT-6 Astra (max) and $0.022 for GLM-5.3 Flash (max).
Last updated , from board data generated at 01:13 UTC.
Picks and Verdict
PickGPT-6 Astra
GPT-6 Astra (max)
Pick GPT-6 Astra (max) for research-heavy scripts, where its lead of almost five points on substance is worth $1.15 a script.
PickGLM-5.3 Flash
GLM-5.3 Flash (max)
Pick GLM-5.3 Flash (max) as the default, because its range overlaps Astra's best and it costs $0.022 a script.
At about two cents a script, GLM-5.3 Flash (max) is where I'd send most of my scripts. GPT-6 Astra is the #11 model of 78 and GLM-5.3 Flash the #12 model, each ranked by its best setting. GPT-6 Astra (max) rates 2185 Elo and Flash 2140, with overlapping 95% ranges, so the board can't separate the two, and Astra costs about 52 times as much: $1.15 against $0.022. The cheaper Astra setting falls clearly behind: GPT-6 Astra (medium) at $0.262 trails Flash by 137 Elo, with separate ranges. More thinking pays for Astra, +182 Elo from medium to max, and even then it can't pull clear of a two-cent model. Astra does write a different kind of script, though. It leads substance, the slop score and visual cues by four to six points each, so its drafts are denser and cleaner. Flash takes YouTube Best Practices by more than four points and finishes four minutes sooner. So Flash is my default, and I'd keep Astra at max for research-heavy pieces where the facts carry the video.
Disclosure: GPT-6 Astra and GLM-5.3 Flash each come from the same lab as one of the judges (GPT-6.1 Sol and GLM 5.3 Flash). Neither is scored by its own lab alone (how the panel works). The judge analysis measures how much each judge favors its own lab.
How to Read the Writing Score, Writing Elo and 95% Ranges
Writing Score and Writing Elo. The Writing Score (0 to 100) is the weighted average of the nine metric scores: seven from the judges, Length Adherence from code and the Slop Score half from each. The Writing Elo is a rating from pairwise comparisons: on each script, each configuration's average across its drafts is compared with every other configuration's, and gaps within the draft-to-draft variation count as draws. Elo rewards winning often, so the two can put configurations in a different order.
Elo ranges. Each 95% range shows how far a configuration's Elo could move if the drafts had come out slightly differently. It comes from resampling every configuration's recorded draft scores on each reference script and ranking again. Comparing two separate ranges does not test the Elo gap between them: ranges far apart are strong evidence for the order, and overlapping ranges do not mean a tie. The reference scripts stay fixed, so the ranges say nothing about new scripts. The methodology page has the full description.
All Thinking Levels of Both Models
Every ranked configuration of GPT-6 Astra and GLM-5.3 Flash, scored on the same 10 scripts by the same four judges.
- Each row is one configuration: the model at one thinking level. The dot is its Writing Elo, a rating from pairwise comparisons of the scores on each script, and the bar is its 95% range: how far that Elo could move if the drafts had come out slightly differently.
- When two bars overlap, the board cannot order those two configurations. Bars far apart are strong evidence for the order.
- The table under the chart lists the same configurations in the same order and adds the Writing Score (the 0 to 100 consensus of the judges and code), cost, time and configuration rank (the place among all configurations on the board).
Shaded rows are the configurations chosen for the metric comparison below.
| Configuration | Writing Elo | 95% Range | Writing Score | Cost / Script | Time / Script | Reasoning Tokens | Configuration Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GPT-6 Astra (max) | 2185 | 2145 to 2223 | 82.3 | $1.15 | 9.2 min | N/A | #21 |
| GLM-5.3 Flash (max) | 2140 | 2093 to 2186 | 81.8 | $0.022 | 5.2 min | 37,224 | #23 |
| GPT-6 Astra (medium) | 2003 | 1968 to 2035 | 80.7 | $0.262 | 1.5 min | N/A | #32 |
Cost is one script at the API list price of the route used, uncached and without judging. Time is the average for one accepted script, retries included. N/A under Reasoning Tokens means the board has no separate reasoning count for that route.
Computed Findings Across Thinking Levels
Each finding is computed from the configurations above. Where two 95% ranges overlap, the board cannot order those two configurations.
- Best Configurations Head to Head. GPT-6 Astra (max) at Elo 2185 (range 2145 to 2223) and GLM-5.3 Flash (max) at Elo 2140 (range 2093 to 2186) have overlapping 95% ranges, so the board cannot separate the two best configurations.
- Same Level Name, Side by Side. At max, the one level name both models use, GPT-6 Astra has the higher Writing Elo: 2185 against 2140. Their 95% ranges overlap there. Level names come from each provider, so the same name does not promise the same reasoning budget.
- Cheapest Configuration Overlapping the Top One. GLM-5.3 Flash (max), at $0.022 per script, is the cheapest configuration whose 95% range overlaps that of GPT-6 Astra (max), at $1.15 per script: 2093 to 2186 against 2145 to 2223, so the board cannot separate them. GPT-6 Astra (max) costs about 52 times as much per script.
- Cheapest GPT-6 Astra Configuration Above GLM-5.3 Flash's Best. The cheapest GPT-6 Astra configuration with a higher Writing Elo than GLM-5.3 Flash (max), at Elo 2140 and $0.022 per script, is GPT-6 Astra (max), at Elo 2185 and $1.15 per script. Their 95% ranges overlap, so the board cannot separate them. It costs about 52 times as much per script.
- Lowest to Highest Thinking Level. GPT-6 Astra moves +182 Elo from medium to max, at about 4.4 times the cost per script.
Two Chosen Configurations Compared
Pick one configuration of each model to compare their metric scores, consistency across drafts and per-script scores. Each menu starts on the model's best configuration.
Scores by Metric
GPT-6 Astra (max) scores higher on five of the nine metrics and GLM-5.3 Flash (max) on four. Weighted by each metric's share of the Writing Score, Substance, Accuracy & Value does the most to put GPT-6 Astra (max) ahead, with a 4.7-point lead on that metric. The weight beside each metric is its share of the Writing Score.
Consistency Across Drafts
| GPT-6 Astra (max) | GLM-5.3 Flash (max) | |
|---|---|---|
| Score spread across drafts (±) | 1.87 | 1.62 |
| Lowest script score | 80.6 Script 1 | 80.3 Script 4 |
| Highest script score | 85.8 Script 9 | 83.8 Script 9 |
| Range across scripts | 5.2 | 3.5 |
Spread is how much the Writing Score moves between a configuration's drafts, and lower is steadier. Green marks the better number in each row.
Scores by Script
Writing Score on each reference script. Gap is GPT-6 Astra (max) minus GLM-5.3 Flash (max), and the higher score is in bold.
| Script | GPT-6 Astra (max) | GLM-5.3 Flash (max) | Gap |
|---|---|---|---|
| Script 1 opinion / warning explainer | 80.6 | 81.1 | -0.5 |
| Script 2 news-analysis / skeptical explainer | 82.0 | 81.5 | +0.5 |
| Script 3 personal roadmap / opinion | 84.3 | 81.0 | +3.3 |
| Script 4 short explainer | 82.7 | 80.3 | +2.4 |
| Script 5 news-analysis / opinion explainer | 81.3 | 82.1 | -0.8 |
| Script 6 founder announcement / personal origin story | 83.6 | 82.9 | +0.7 |
| Script 7 personal technical walkthrough / agentic workflow case study | 81.6 | 83.5 | -1.9 |
| Script 8 product release announcement / personal observation | 80.6 | 80.8 | -0.2 |
| Script 9 career guide / hiring analysis | 85.8 | 83.8 | +2.0 |
| Script 10 engineering process walkthrough / presentation adaptation | 80.7 | 81.2 | -0.5 |
Scorecards and Thinking Pages
Each configuration name in the table above opens its own scorecard.
Compare With Another Model
Pick a second model. A pair with its own written match-up opens that page, and any other pair opens in the comparison tool.
Nearby Match-Ups by Best Writing Elo
Every configuration wrote five drafts for each of the same 10 briefs, from the same prompt. Generation was closed-book, with the prompt as the only source and no web search or other tools. Each judge scores every draft once: Claude Opus 5.5 at medium effort through the Claude Code subscription, GPT-6.1 Sol at medium reasoning through the Codex CLI, GLM 5.3 Flash through OpenRouter, and Jev 1.13, a typed judge from TypeSafe that answers each metric as a multiple-choice question. The channel's finished script is their reference for the voice, and it gets no score on the board itself.
← All comparisons