Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GLM 5.1 vs Kimi K2 0905

GLM 5.1 leads Kimi K2 0905 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 26.1 to 15.3, and Kimi K2 0905 costs 1.8x less per output token ($2.50 vs $4.40 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 11 benchmarks have a result for both.

GLM 5.1Z.ai
Coding
49.2
Overall
57.5
Output $/M
$4.40
11
Kimi K2 0905Moonshot AI
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$2.50
0
vs boards won of 11 shared

GLM 5.1 or Kimi K2 0905: which to pick

Only GLM 5.1 has a coding score, 49.2 on the Vibe Coding Index; Kimi K2 0905 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Kimi K2 0905 for output tokens 1.8x cheaper ($2.50 vs $4.40 per million) and a larger context window (262K against 205K tokens).

Shared results
11
GLM 5.1 only
78
Kimi K2 0905 only
6
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 5.1 49.2 from 3 benchmarks, Kimi K2 0905 not benchmarked.
Widest category
General, 27.6 points apart on average over 2 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
IFBench: GLM 5.1 76.3% against Kimi K2 0905 41.7%, 34.6 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GLM 5.1 $4.40 against Kimi K2 0905 $2.50 per million output tokens, 1.8x apart.
Context window
GLM 5.1 takes 205K 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 5.1BarsKimi K2 0905Ties
Coding30
Intelligence10
Agentic work10
Reasoning20
Web design20
General20
All shared boards110
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index30
Coding benchmarks for GLM 5.1 and Kimi K2 0905
BenchmarkGLM 5.1Kimi K2 0905Leader
LMArena WebDev1508Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
AA Coding Index55.8Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)81.4%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)76.4%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)31.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Code migration (Vals AI)25.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
ProgramBench (Vals AI)0.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)56.9%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured61.0%Only Kimi K2 0905 measured
SciCode44.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)43.2%23.5%GLM 5.1
WeirdML57.1%36.7%GLM 5.1
ALE-Bench887.1267.1GLM 5.1
LMArena Text: coding1485Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1484Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena WebDev: React1505Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML1508Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 22 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for GLM 5.1 and Kimi K2 0905
BenchmarkGLM 5.1Kimi K2 0905Leader
AA Intelligence Index26.115.3GLM 5.1
Epoch Capabilities Index149.8Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Agentic work benchmarks for GLM 5.1 and Kimi K2 0905
BenchmarkGLM 5.1Kimi K2 0905Leader
AA Agentic Index23.9Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Design Arena: agents building web apps1175Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Design Arena: agents building full-stack apps1167Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile apps1162Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Design Arena: agents building Android apps1180Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Design Arena: agents building Godot games1053Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Design Arena: agents building games1164Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Design Arena: HTML slides1170Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Design Arena: PowerPoint slides1188Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Design Arena: spreadsheets1315Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)44.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)27.9%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
τ²-Bench Telecom97.7%73.4%GLM 5.1
APEX-Agents40.9%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Vending-Bench 2$5,634Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 26 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Reasoning benchmarks for GLM 5.1 and Kimi K2 0905
BenchmarkGLM 5.1Kimi K2 0905Leader
GPQA Diamond84.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)86.8%76.7%GLM 5.1
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)30.1%6.4%GLM 5.1
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)89.9%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
SimpleBench55.1%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Chess puzzles20.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts1473Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: expert1478Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English1482Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Kagi LLM BenchmarkNot measured52.2%Only Kimi K2 0905 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for GLM 5.1 and Kimi K2 0905
BenchmarkGLM 5.1Kimi K2 0905Leader
AIME91.9%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
AA Math IndexNot measured57.3Only Kimi K2 0905 measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured57.3%Only Kimi K2 0905 measured
OTIS Mock AIME93.3%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 336.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
ProofBench22.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: math1473Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work1470Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index12 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for GLM 5.1 and Kimi K2 0905
BenchmarkGLM 5.1Kimi K2 0905Leader
MMLU Pro86.9%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)84.4%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
CaseLaw (Vals AI)51.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)64.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)71.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
MedCode (Vals AI)41.6%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured81.9%Only Kimi K2 0905 measured
SimpleQA Verified34.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: science1478Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare1474Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: legal and government1465Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: business and finance1452Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Web design benchmarks for GLM 5.1 and Kimi K2 0905
BenchmarkGLM 5.1Kimi K2 0905Leader
Design Arena: websites12901089GLM 5.1
Design Arena: UI components1292Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Design Arena: game dev1265Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Design Arena: data viz1366Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Design Arena: 3D1336Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Design Arena: all code categories12681098GLM 5.1
Design Arena: SVG1218Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Design Arena: ASCII art1142Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
General benchmarks for GLM 5.1 and Kimi K2 0905
BenchmarkGLM 5.1Kimi K2 0905Leader
Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI)61.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)72.3%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
IFBench76.3%41.7%GLM 5.1
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)73.7%53.0%GLM 5.1
Fiction.LiveBenchNot measured66.7%Only Kimi K2 0905 measured
ExploitBench18.1%Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text1463Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: instruction following1453Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: creative writing1453Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: English1476Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: non-English1448Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: Chinese1515Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: German1467Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: Japanese1435Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: Korean1424Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: French1470Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1468Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: Russian1454Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: Polish1449Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn1473Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: longer queries1467Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: writing and language1454Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media1442Not measuredOnly GLM 5.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 23 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GLM 5.1 and Kimi K2 0905
BenchmarkGLM 5.1Kimi 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 5.1$0.0036Fits in one request
Kimi K2 0905$0.0019Fits in one request

Kimi K2 0905 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GLM 5.1$0.083Fits in one request
Kimi K2 0905$0.037Fits in one request

Kimi K2 0905 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GLM 5.1$0.324Exceeds the context window
Kimi K2 0905$0.145Fits in one request

Kimi K2 0905 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 5.1 and Kimi K2 0905
SpecificationZ.ai GLM 5.1MoonshotAI Kimi K2 0905
MakerZ.aiMoonshot AI
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedApril 7, 2026September 4, 2025
Context window205K262K
Input $/Mtok$1.40$0.60
Output $/Mtok$4.40$2.50
Coding index49.2Not benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it30
Cost per solved task$0.60Not computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GLM 5.1 better than Kimi K2 0905 for coding?

Only GLM 5.1 has a coding score, 49.2 on the Vibe Coding Index; Kimi K2 0905 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Kimi K2 0905 for output tokens 1.8x cheaper ($2.50 vs $4.40 per million) and a larger context window (262K against 205K tokens).

Which is cheaper, GLM 5.1 or Kimi K2 0905?

GLM 5.1 costs $1.40 per million input tokens and $4.40 per million output tokens; Kimi K2 0905 costs $0.60 and $2.50. Cost per solved task is known for GLM 5.1 only.

Which has the bigger context window, GLM 5.1 or Kimi K2 0905?

Kimi K2 0905, with 262K tokens against 205K.

How many benchmarks is the GLM 5.1 vs Kimi K2 0905 comparison based on?

11 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. GLM 5.1's coding index rests on 3 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