Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GLM 4.5 vs Kimi K2 0905

Kimi K2 0905 leads GLM 4.5 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 15.3 to 12.8, at about the same output price ($2.50 vs $2.20 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 15 benchmarks have a result for both.

GLM 4.5Z.ai
Coding
No data
Overall
12.8
Output $/M
$2.20
11
Kimi K2 0905Moonshot AI
Coding
No data
Overall
15.3
Output $/M
$2.50
4
vs boards won of 15 shared

GLM 4.5 or Kimi K2 0905: which to pick

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick GLM 4.5 for output tokens 1.1x cheaper ($2.20 vs $2.50 per million) and work measured by Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) or AA Intelligence Index, where it leads.

Shared results
15
GLM 4.5 only
45
Kimi K2 0905 only
1
Like-for-like categories
8 of 9

Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.

Which one for your work

Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.

At a glance

Coding index
GLM 4.5 not benchmarked, Kimi K2 0905 not benchmarked.
Widest category
Agentic work, 30.4 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
τ²-Bench Telecom: GLM 4.5 43.0% against Kimi K2 0905 73.4%, 30.4 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GLM 4.5 $2.20 against Kimi K2 0905 $2.50 per million output tokens, 1.1x apart.
Context window
GLM 4.5 takes 131K tokens, Kimi K2 0905 262K.

Benchmark by benchmark

First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryGLM 4.5BarsKimi K2 0905Ties
Coding31
Intelligence01
Agentic work01
Reasoning20
Math20
Knowledge10
Web design20
General11
All shared boards114
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index31
Coding benchmarks for GLM 4.5 and Kimi K2 0905
BenchmarkGLM 4.5Kimi K2 0905Leader
SWE-bench Verified64.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)67.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)73.8%61.0%GLM 4.5
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)22.0%23.5%Kimi K2 0905
WeirdML40.6%36.7%GLM 4.5
ALE-Bench344.8267.1GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: coding1434Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1440Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 30 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for GLM 4.5 and Kimi K2 0905
BenchmarkGLM 4.5Kimi K2 0905Leader
AA Intelligence Index12.815.3Kimi K2 0905
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Agentic work benchmarks for GLM 4.5 and Kimi K2 0905
BenchmarkGLM 4.5Kimi K2 0905Leader
τ²-Bench Telecom43.0%73.4%Kimi K2 0905
Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Reasoning benchmarks for GLM 4.5 and Kimi K2 0905
BenchmarkGLM 4.5Kimi K2 0905Leader
GPQA Diamond72.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)78.2%76.7%GLM 4.5
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)13.0%6.4%GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: hard prompts1429Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: expert1433Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English1429Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Math benchmarks for GLM 4.5 and Kimi K2 0905
BenchmarkGLM 4.5Kimi K2 0905Leader
AIME86.7%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
MATH 500 (Vals AI)94.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
MGSM (Vals AI)90.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
AA Math Index73.757.3GLM 4.5
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)73.7%57.3%GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: math1427Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work1430Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Knowledge benchmarks for GLM 4.5 and Kimi K2 0905
BenchmarkGLM 4.5Kimi K2 0905Leader
MMLU Pro81.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)75.6%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)61.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)72.4%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
MedQA (Vals AI)90.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)83.5%81.9%GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: science1444Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare1455Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: legal and government1438Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: business and finance1420Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Web design benchmarks for GLM 4.5 and Kimi K2 0905
BenchmarkGLM 4.5Kimi K2 0905Leader
Design Arena: websites11701089GLM 4.5
Design Arena: UI components1144Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
Design Arena: game dev1145Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
Design Arena: data viz1159Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
Design Arena: 3D1170Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
Design Arena: all code categories11651098GLM 4.5
Design Arena: SVG1096Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 2 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index11
General benchmarks for GLM 4.5 and Kimi K2 0905
BenchmarkGLM 4.5Kimi K2 0905Leader
IFBench44.1%41.7%GLM 4.5
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)52.7%53.0%Kimi K2 0905
Fiction.LiveBenchNot measured66.7%Only Kimi K2 0905 measured
Creative writing (Lech Mazur)73.4%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text1430Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: instruction following1404Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: creative writing1395Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: English1437Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: non-English1417Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: Chinese1465Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: German1407Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: Japanese1415Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: Korean1380Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: French1418Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1454Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: Russian1413Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: Polish1422Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn1415Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: longer queries1412Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: writing and language1403Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media1404Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 25 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GLM 4.5 and Kimi K2 0905
BenchmarkGLM 4.5Kimi K2 0905Leader
Neither model has a result on 5 boards here

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.

Chat turn

1K input + 500 output tokens

GLM 4.5$0.0017Fits in one request
Kimi K2 0905$0.0019Fits in one request

GLM 4.5 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GLM 4.5$0.037Fits in one request
Kimi K2 0905$0.037Fits in one request

GLM 4.5 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GLM 4.5$0.142Exceeds the context window
Kimi K2 0905$0.145Fits in one request

GLM 4.5 costs less

Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.

Specification differences

The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.

Specifications of GLM 4.5 and Kimi K2 0905
SpecificationZ.ai GLM 4.5MoonshotAI Kimi K2 0905
MakerZ.aiMoonshot AI
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedJuly 25, 2025September 4, 2025
Context window131K262K
Input $/Mtok$0.60$0.60
Output $/Mtok$2.20$2.50
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GLM 4.5 better than Kimi K2 0905 for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick GLM 4.5 for output tokens 1.1x cheaper ($2.20 vs $2.50 per million) and work measured by Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) or AA Intelligence Index, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, GLM 4.5 or Kimi K2 0905?

GLM 4.5 costs $0.60 per million input tokens and $2.20 per million output tokens; Kimi K2 0905 costs $0.60 and $2.50. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, GLM 4.5 or Kimi K2 0905?

Kimi K2 0905, with 262K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks is the GLM 4.5 vs Kimi K2 0905 comparison based on?

15 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. GLM 4.5's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Kimi K2 0905's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next