Model comparison
GLM-4.6 vs Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo
Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.8 to 41.4 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 18 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.6 scores higher in 5 categories and Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo in 3 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo leads 50.9 to 40.2.
Side by side
| GLM-4.6 | Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | Moonshot AI |
| Noometry Index | 41.4 | 45.8 |
| Released | 2025-09-30 | 2025-11-06 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 205K | — |
| Max output | 131K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.60 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $2.20 | — |
| Results tracked | 29 | 21 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GLM-4.6 leads
GLM-4.6: 40.1 (#148), Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 38.4 (#178)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1340 | 1322 |
| LMArena Coding | 1449 | 1454 |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 55.4% | — |
| SciCode | 38.4% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 340.82 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
GLM-4.6: 32.3 (#66), Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 24.5% | — |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 72.4% | — |
Reasoning Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo leads
GLM-4.6: 23.7 (#172), Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 32.5 (#75)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1440 | 1428 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 47.4% | — |
| CritPt | 1.1% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 20% |
Math Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo leads
GLM-4.6: 39.1 (#111), Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 47.4 (#68)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1432 | 1429 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 83.1% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 3.8% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 2.1% | — |
Knowledge Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo leads
GLM-4.6: 40.2 (#124), Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 50.9 (#69)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1431 | 1439 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 84.2% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 9.5% | — |
Multilingual GLM-4.6 leads
GLM-4.6: 53.5 (#66), Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 51.4 (#109)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1426 | 1398 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1499 | 1456 |
| LMArena French | 1459 | 1425 |
| LMArena German | 1447 | 1390 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1393 | 1357 |
| LMArena Korean | 1400 | 1330 |
| LMArena Russian | 1419 | 1391 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1436 | 1406 |
Instruction Following Too close to call
GLM-4.6: 74.3 (#98), Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 74.0 (#109)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1410 | 1403 |
Long Context Too close to call
GLM-4.6: 43.4 (#94), Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 43.2 (#102)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1422 | 1415 |
Writing & Preference GLM-4.6 leads
GLM-4.6: 61.1 (#90), Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 60.0 (#104)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1440 | 1415 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1411 | 1374 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1427 | 1414 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1411 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is GLM-4.6 better than Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo?
Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.8 to 41.4 on the Noometry Index.
Is GLM-4.6 or Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo better for coding?
GLM-4.6 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.1 versus 38.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do GLM-4.6 and Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo share?
18 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.6 has 29 scored results on Noometry and Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo has 21.