Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GLM 4.5 vs Kimi K2.7 Code

Kimi K2.7 Code leads GLM 4.5 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 25.8 to 12.8, and GLM 4.5 costs 1.8x less per output token ($2.20 vs $4.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 17 benchmarks have a result for both.

GLM 4.5Z.ai
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$2.20
0
Kimi K2.7 CodeMoonshot AI
Coding
53.4
Overall
56.7
Output $/M
$4.00
17
vs boards won of 17 shared

GLM 4.5 or Kimi K2.7 Code: which to pick

Only Kimi K2.7 Code has a coding score, 53.4 on the Vibe Coding Index; GLM 4.5 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick GLM 4.5 for output tokens 1.8x cheaper ($2.20 vs $4.00 per million).

Shared results
17
GLM 4.5 only
44
Kimi K2.7 Code only
34
Like-for-like categories
6 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 K2.7 Code 53.4 from 4 benchmarks.
Widest category
Agentic work, 47.1 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
τ²-Bench Telecom: GLM 4.5 43.0% against Kimi K2.7 Code 90.1%, 47.1 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GLM 4.5 $2.20 against Kimi K2.7 Code $4.00 per million output tokens, 1.8x apart.
Context window
GLM 4.5 takes 131K tokens, Kimi K2.7 Code 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 K2.7 CodeTies
Coding04
Intelligence01
Agentic work01
Reasoning02
Web design07
General02
All shared boards017
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index04
Coding benchmarks for GLM 4.5 and Kimi K2.7 Code
BenchmarkGLM 4.5Kimi K2.7 CodeLeader
SWE-bench Verified64.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena WebDevNot measured1474Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
AA Coding IndexNot measured60.8Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)67.5%82.0%Kimi K2.7 Code
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)Not measured78.2%Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)Not measured47.2%Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
Code migration (Vals AI)Not measured25.4%Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
ProgramBench (Vals AI)Not measured0.0%Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)Not measured67.0%Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
SkillsBench (Vals AI)Not measured50.0%Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)73.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
SciCodeNot measured47.8%Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)22.0%44.7%Kimi K2.7 Code
FrontierCodeNot measured30.1%Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
WeirdML40.6%54.1%Kimi K2.7 Code
ALE-Bench344.8886.2Kimi K2.7 Code
LMArena Text: coding1434Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1440Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena WebDev: ReactNot measured1475Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
LMArena WebDev: HTMLNot measured1451Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
LMArena WebDev: from an imageNot measured1513Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
Neither model has a result on the other 18 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for GLM 4.5 and Kimi K2.7 Code
BenchmarkGLM 4.5Kimi K2.7 CodeLeader
AA Intelligence Index12.825.8Kimi K2.7 Code
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured150.1Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Agentic work benchmarks for GLM 4.5 and Kimi K2.7 Code
BenchmarkGLM 4.5Kimi K2.7 CodeLeader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured21.0Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
Design Arena: agents building web appsNot measured1176Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
Design Arena: agents building full-stack appsNot measured1175Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile appsNot measured1143Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
Design Arena: agents building Android appsNot measured1138Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
Design Arena: agents building Godot gamesNot measured1147Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
Design Arena: agents building gamesNot measured1130Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
Design Arena: HTML slidesNot measured1151Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
Design Arena: PowerPoint slidesNot measured1129Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
τ²-Bench Telecom43.0%90.1%Kimi K2.7 Code
APEX-AgentsNot measured37.6%Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
Vending-Bench 2Not measured$5,083Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
Neither model has a result on the other 29 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Reasoning benchmarks for GLM 4.5 and Kimi K2.7 Code
BenchmarkGLM 4.5Kimi K2.7 CodeLeader
GPQA Diamond72.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)78.2%89.6%Kimi K2.7 Code
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)13.0%35.0%Kimi K2.7 Code
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)Not measured87.9%Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
SimpleBenchNot measured57.9%Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
Chess puzzlesNot measured14.0%Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
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
Kagi LLM Benchmark57.9%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for GLM 4.5 and Kimi K2.7 Code
BenchmarkGLM 4.5Kimi K2.7 CodeLeader
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 Index73.7Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)73.7%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
OTIS Mock AIMENot measured95.6%Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3Not measured54.0%Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
FrontierMath, tier 4Not measured12.2%Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
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 3 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index11 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for GLM 4.5 and Kimi K2.7 Code
BenchmarkGLM 4.5Kimi K2.7 CodeLeader
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%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
SimpleQA VerifiedNot measured36.5%Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
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 index07
Web design benchmarks for GLM 4.5 and Kimi K2.7 Code
BenchmarkGLM 4.5Kimi K2.7 CodeLeader
Design Arena: websites11691263Kimi K2.7 Code
Design Arena: UI components11411255Kimi K2.7 Code
Design Arena: game dev11441220Kimi K2.7 Code
Design Arena: data viz11591227Kimi K2.7 Code
Design Arena: 3D11701240Kimi K2.7 Code
Design Arena: all code categories11651252Kimi K2.7 Code
Design Arena: SVG10961176Kimi K2.7 Code
Design Arena: ASCII artNot measured1196Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
General benchmarks for GLM 4.5 and Kimi K2.7 Code
BenchmarkGLM 4.5Kimi K2.7 CodeLeader
IFBench44.1%63.1%Kimi K2.7 Code
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)52.7%79.3%Kimi K2.7 Code
Creative writing (Lech Mazur)73.4%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
Surface Evolver BenchNot measured48.8%Only Kimi K2.7 Code 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 K2.7 Code
BenchmarkGLM 4.5Kimi K2.7 CodeLeader
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 K2.7 Code$0.0029Fits in one request

GLM 4.5 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GLM 4.5$0.037Fits in one request
Kimi K2.7 Code$0.059Fits in one request

GLM 4.5 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GLM 4.5$0.142Exceeds the context window
Kimi K2.7 Code$0.230Fits 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 K2.7 Code
SpecificationZ.ai GLM 4.5MoonshotAI Kimi K2.7 Code
MakerZ.aiMoonshot AI
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedJuly 25, 2025June 12, 2026
Context window131K262K
Input $/Mtok$0.60$0.95
Output $/Mtok$2.20$4.00
Coding indexNot benchmarked53.4
Independent measurements behind it04
Cost per solved taskNot computable$0.35
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GLM 4.5 better than Kimi K2.7 Code for coding?

Only Kimi K2.7 Code has a coding score, 53.4 on the Vibe Coding Index; GLM 4.5 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick GLM 4.5 for output tokens 1.8x cheaper ($2.20 vs $4.00 per million).

Which is cheaper, GLM 4.5 or Kimi K2.7 Code?

GLM 4.5 costs $0.60 per million input tokens and $2.20 per million output tokens; Kimi K2.7 Code costs $0.95 and $4.00. Cost per solved task is known for Kimi K2.7 Code only.

Which has the bigger context window, GLM 4.5 or Kimi K2.7 Code?

Kimi K2.7 Code, with 262K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks is the GLM 4.5 vs Kimi K2.7 Code comparison based on?

17 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. GLM 4.5's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Kimi K2.7 Code's on 4. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next