Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GLM 4.7 Flash vs Kimi K2.6

Updated October 21, 2026. 43 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.

Replace GLM 4.7 Flash Replace Kimi K2.6
GLM 4.7 FlashZ.ai
Coding
No data
Overall
14.9
Output $/M
$0.40
1
Kimi K2.6Moonshot AI
Coding
52.1
Overall
27.0
Output $/M
$4.00
42
vs boards won of 43 shared

Decision reading

Only Kimi K2.6 has a coding score, 52.1 on the Vibe Coding Index; GLM 4.7 Flash has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

GLM 4.7 Flash has the edge where output tokens cost 10.0x less, and where the benchmark that matters is τ²-Bench Telecom, where it leads.

Model AGLM 4.7 FlashZ.aiNot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved taskModel BKimi K2.6Moonshot AI52.1/1003 independent benchmarks$0.35 per solved task
Shared results
43
GLM 4.7 Flash only
0
Kimi K2.6 only
66
Like-for-like categories
8 of 9

Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results only one model has describe coverage, not superiority.

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 4.7 Flash not benchmarked, Kimi K2.6 52.1 from 3 benchmarks.
Widest category
Math, 25.3 points apart on average over 3 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR): GLM 4.7 Flash 41.7% against Kimi K2.6 81.0%, 39.3 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GLM 4.7 Flash $0.40 against Kimi K2.6 $4.00 per million output tokens, 10.0x apart.
Context window
GLM 4.7 Flash takes 200K tokens, Kimi K2.6 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 4.7 FlashBarsKimi K2.6Ties
Coding03
Intelligence01
Agentic work10
Reasoning06
Math03
Knowledge04
Web design07
General018
All shared boards142
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index03
Coding benchmarks for GLM 4.7 Flash and Kimi K2.6
BenchmarkGLM 4.7 FlashKimi K2.6Leader
LMArena WebDevNot measured1509Only Kimi K2.6 measured
AA Coding IndexNot measured61.8Only Kimi K2.6 measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)Not measured86.8%Only Kimi K2.6 measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)Not measured76.2%Only Kimi K2.6 measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)Not measured37.9%Only Kimi K2.6 measured
Code migration (Vals AI)Not measured27.8%Only Kimi K2.6 measured
ProgramBench (Vals AI)Not measured0.0%Only Kimi K2.6 measured
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)Not measured53.6%Only Kimi K2.6 measured
SciCodeNot measured51.5%Only Kimi K2.6 measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)22.0%43.9%Kimi K2.6
WeirdMLNot measured55.9%Only Kimi K2.6 measured
ALE-BenchNot measured1092.7Only Kimi K2.6 measured
LMArena Text: coding13821489Kimi K2.6
LMArena Text: software and IT13891484Kimi K2.6
LMArena WebDev: ReactNot measured1505Only Kimi K2.6 measured
LMArena WebDev: HTMLNot measured1485Only Kimi K2.6 measured
LMArena WebDev: from an imageNot measured1521Only Kimi K2.6 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 21 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for GLM 4.7 Flash and Kimi K2.6
BenchmarkGLM 4.7 FlashKimi K2.6Leader
AA Intelligence Index14.927.0Kimi K2.6
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured150.9Only Kimi K2.6 measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Agentic work benchmarks for GLM 4.7 Flash and Kimi K2.6
BenchmarkGLM 4.7 FlashKimi K2.6Leader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured20.5Only Kimi K2.6 measured
Design Arena: agents building web appsNot measured1268Only Kimi K2.6 measured
Design Arena: agents building full-stack appsNot measured1155Only Kimi K2.6 measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile appsNot measured1157Only Kimi K2.6 measured
Design Arena: agents building Android appsNot measured1166Only Kimi K2.6 measured
Design Arena: agents building Godot gamesNot measured1120Only Kimi K2.6 measured
Design Arena: agents building gamesNot measured1141Only Kimi K2.6 measured
Design Arena: HTML slidesNot measured1184Only Kimi K2.6 measured
Design Arena: PowerPoint slidesNot measured1128Only Kimi K2.6 measured
Design Arena: spreadsheetsNot measured1276Only Kimi K2.6 measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)Not measured44.9%Only Kimi K2.6 measured
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)Not measured12.4%Only Kimi K2.6 measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)Not measured15.9%Only Kimi K2.6 measured
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)Not measured57.9%Only Kimi K2.6 measured
τ²-Bench Telecom98.8%95.9%GLM 4.7 Flash
OSWorld 2.0Not measured4.6%Only Kimi K2.6 measured
Vending-Bench 2Not measured$6,205Only Kimi K2.6 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 22 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index06
Reasoning benchmarks for GLM 4.7 Flash and Kimi K2.6
BenchmarkGLM 4.7 FlashKimi K2.6Leader
GPQA DiamondNot measured89.1%Only Kimi K2.6 measured
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)Not measured86.3%Only Kimi K2.6 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)58.1%91.1%Kimi K2.6
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)7.6%37.5%Kimi K2.6
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)60.5%90.8%Kimi K2.6
Chess puzzlesNot measured20.0%Only Kimi K2.6 measured
Mystery game puzzlesNot measured18.0%Only Kimi K2.6 measured
EBR-benchNot measured2.4%Only Kimi K2.6 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts13561470Kimi K2.6
LMArena Text: expert13571491Kimi K2.6
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English13691471Kimi K2.6
LMArena Vision: diagramsNot measured1298Only Kimi K2.6 measured
LMArena Vision: homeworkNot measured1310Only Kimi K2.6 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index03
Math benchmarks for GLM 4.7 Flash and Kimi K2.6
BenchmarkGLM 4.7 FlashKimi K2.6Leader
OTIS Mock AIME58.3%96.1%Kimi K2.6
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3Not measured57.2%Only Kimi K2.6 measured
FrontierMath, tier 4Not measured25.6%Only Kimi K2.6 measured
ProofBenchNot measured16.0%Only Kimi K2.6 measured
LMArena Text: math13551474Kimi K2.6
LMArena Text: mathematical work13691480Kimi K2.6
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
Knowledge benchmarks for GLM 4.7 Flash and Kimi K2.6
BenchmarkGLM 4.7 FlashKimi K2.6Leader
MMLU ProNot measured87.6%Only Kimi K2.6 measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)Not measured84.7%Only Kimi K2.6 measured
CaseLaw (Vals AI)Not measured61.2%Only Kimi K2.6 measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)Not measured66.7%Only Kimi K2.6 measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)Not measured74.7%Only Kimi K2.6 measured
MortgageTax (Vals AI)Not measured65.8%Only Kimi K2.6 measured
MedCode (Vals AI)Not measured40.1%Only Kimi K2.6 measured
SimpleQA VerifiedNot measured34.9%Only Kimi K2.6 measured
LMArena Text: science13581468Kimi K2.6
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare13431457Kimi K2.6
LMArena Text: legal and government13571462Kimi K2.6
LMArena Text: business and finance13431445Kimi K2.6
Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index07
Web design benchmarks for GLM 4.7 Flash and Kimi K2.6
BenchmarkGLM 4.7 FlashKimi K2.6Leader
Design Arena: websites11941269Kimi K2.6
Design Arena: UI components12081266Kimi K2.6
Design Arena: game dev11351250Kimi K2.6
Design Arena: data viz11231248Kimi K2.6
Design Arena: 3D11211268Kimi K2.6
Design Arena: all code categories11781272Kimi K2.6
Design Arena: SVG10381181Kimi K2.6
Design Arena: ASCII artNot measured1164Only Kimi K2.6 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index018
General benchmarks for GLM 4.7 Flash and Kimi K2.6
BenchmarkGLM 4.7 FlashKimi K2.6Leader
Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI)Not measured56.6%Only Kimi K2.6 measured
SAGE (Vals AI)Not measured50.2%Only Kimi K2.6 measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)Not measured78.2%Only Kimi K2.6 measured
Vals Multimodal IndexNot measured56.4%Only Kimi K2.6 measured
IFBench60.8%76.0%Kimi K2.6
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)41.7%81.0%Kimi K2.6
DTBenchNot measured90.9%Only Kimi K2.6 measured
LMCANot measured37.3%Only Kimi K2.6 measured
Furniture assemblyNot measured21.7%Only Kimi K2.6 measured
ExploitBenchNot measured18.4%Only Kimi K2.6 measured
LMArena Text13511455Kimi K2.6
LMArena Text: instruction following13271451Kimi K2.6
LMArena Text: creative writing12961434Kimi K2.6
LMArena VisionNot measured1282Only Kimi K2.6 measured
LMArena Text: English13731460Kimi K2.6
LMArena Text: non-English13301446Kimi K2.6
LMArena Text: Chinese14031520Kimi K2.6
LMArena Text: German13361451Kimi K2.6
LMArena Text: JapaneseNot measured1443Only Kimi K2.6 measured
LMArena Text: Korean12831427Kimi K2.6
LMArena Text: French13321471Kimi K2.6
LMArena Text: Spanish13501464Kimi K2.6
LMArena Text: Russian13331446Kimi K2.6
LMArena Text: Polish12911438Kimi K2.6
LMArena Text: multi-turn13421453Kimi K2.6
LMArena Text: longer queries13451468Kimi K2.6
LMArena Text: writing and language13201439Kimi K2.6
LMArena Text: entertainment and media13041428Kimi K2.6
LMArena Vision: EnglishNot measured1287Only Kimi K2.6 measured
LMArena Vision: ChineseNot measured1346Only Kimi K2.6 measured
LMArena Vision: reading textNot measured1291Only Kimi K2.6 measured
LMArena Vision: humorNot measured1280Only Kimi K2.6 measured
LMArena Vision: creative writingNot measured1273Only Kimi K2.6 measured
LMArena DocumentNot measured1451Only Kimi K2.6 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GLM 4.7 Flash and Kimi K2.6
BenchmarkGLM 4.7 FlashKimi K2.6Leader
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 4.7 Flash$0.0003Fits in one request
Kimi K2.6$0.0029Fits in one request

GLM 4.7 Flash costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GLM 4.7 Flash$0.0045Fits in one request
Kimi K2.6$0.059Fits in one request

GLM 4.7 Flash costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GLM 4.7 Flash$0.017Exceeds the context window
Kimi K2.6$0.230Fits in one request

GLM 4.7 Flash 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 4.7 Flash and Kimi K2.6
SpecificationZ.ai GLM 4.7 FlashMoonshotAI Kimi K2.6
MakerZ.aiMoonshot AI
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedJanuary 19, 2026April 20, 2026
Context window200K262K
Input $/Mtok$0.0653$0.95
Output $/Mtok$0.40$4.00
Coding indexNot benchmarked52.1
Independent measurements behind it03
Cost per solved taskNot computable$0.35
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GLM 4.7 Flash better than Kimi K2.6 for coding?

Only Kimi K2.6 has a coding score, 52.1 on the Vibe Coding Index; GLM 4.7 Flash has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. GLM 4.7 Flash has the edge where output tokens cost 10.0x less, and where the benchmark that matters is τ²-Bench Telecom, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, GLM 4.7 Flash or Kimi K2.6?

GLM 4.7 Flash costs $0.0653 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; Kimi K2.6 costs $0.95 and $4.00. Cost per solved task is known for Kimi K2.6 only.

Which has the bigger context window, GLM 4.7 Flash or Kimi K2.6?

Kimi K2.6, with 262K tokens against 200K.

How many benchmarks is the GLM 4.7 Flash vs Kimi K2.6 comparison based on?

43 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. GLM 4.7 Flash's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Kimi K2.6's on 3. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next