Model comparison
GLM-4.6V vs Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo
Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.4 to 40.9 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 11 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.6V scores higher in 1 category and Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo in 6 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo leads 50.9 to 37.4.
Side by side
| GLM-4.6V | Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | Moonshot AI |
| Noometry Index | 40.9 | 45.4 |
| Released | 2025-12-08 | 2025-11-06 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 128K | — |
| Max output | 33K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.30 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.90 | — |
| Results tracked | 12 | 21 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GLM-4.6V leads
GLM-4.6V: 40.2 (#128), Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 38.1 (#166)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1390 | 1454 |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1322 |
Reasoning Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo leads
GLM-4.6V: 26.5 (#117), Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 31.4 (#72)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1368 | 1428 |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 20% |
Math Not comparable
GLM-4.6V: —, Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 45.5 (#62)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 83.1% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1429 |
Knowledge Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo leads
GLM-4.6V: 37.4 (#148), Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 50.9 (#64)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1372 | 1439 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 84.2% |
Multimodal Not comparable
GLM-4.6V: 34.2 (#83), Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1164 | — |
Multilingual Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo leads
GLM-4.6V: 48.8 (#135), Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 51.6 (#104)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1359 | 1398 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1426 | 1457 |
| LMArena Russian | 1341 | 1390 |
| LMArena French | — | 1425 |
| LMArena German | — | 1390 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1356 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1329 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1407 |
Instruction Following Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo leads
GLM-4.6V: 71.6 (#145), Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 74.2 (#103)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1351 | 1403 |
Long Context Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo leads
GLM-4.6V: 41.3 (#138), Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 43.2 (#99)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1358 | 1415 |
Writing & Preference Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo leads
GLM-4.6V: 56.8 (#132), Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 60.2 (#99)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1377 | 1415 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1347 | 1373 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1359 | 1414 |
Frequently asked questions
Is GLM-4.6V better than Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo?
Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.4 to 40.9 on the Noometry Index.
Is GLM-4.6V or Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo better for coding?
GLM-4.6V scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.2 versus 38.1 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do GLM-4.6V and Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo share?
11 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.6V has 12 scored results on Noometry and Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo has 21.