Noometry

Model comparison

GLM-5.1 vs Kimi K2.7 Code

GLM-5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.8 to 43.3 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 15 shared benchmarks.

GLM-5.1 Z.ai (Zhipu)

47.8

Rank #59 Confirmed

Kimi K2.7 Code Moonshot AI

43.3

Rank #94 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 15 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-5.1 scores higher in 4 categories and Kimi K2.7 Code in 1 category; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in coding, where GLM-5.1 leads 48.7 to 42.9.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3): 36.8% for GLM-5.1 and 54% for Kimi K2.7 Code.
  • Kimi K2.7 Code is cheaper at $0.95 / $4 per million input/output tokens, against $1.40 / $4.40 for GLM-5.1.
  • Kimi K2.7 Code accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 200K.

Side by side

GLM-5.1Kimi K2.7 Code
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)Moonshot AI
Noometry Index47.843.3
Released2026-04-072026-06-12
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window200K262K
Max output131K262K
Input $ / M tokens$1.40$0.95
Output $ / M tokens$4.40$4
Results tracked4119

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding GLM-5.1 leads

GLM-5.1: 48.7 (#55), Kimi K2.7 Code: 42.9 (#95)

BenchmarkGLM-5.1Kimi K2.7 Code
LMArena WebDev15081473
SciCode43.8%47.5%
WeirdML57.1%54.1%
ALE-Bench887.1886.23
SWE-bench Verified74.2%—
DeepSWE—30.5%
FrontierCode—30.1%
LMArena Coding1485—

Agentic & Tool Use Too close to call

GLM-5.1: 24.9 (#113), Kimi K2.7 Code: 24.0 (#122)

BenchmarkGLM-5.1Kimi K2.7 Code
APEX-Agents40.9%37.6%
GBAEval0%0.9%
Vending-Bench 25,6345,083
ExploitBench18.1%—

Reasoning Too close to call

GLM-5.1: 39.1 (#60), Kimi K2.7 Code: 39.0 (#61)

BenchmarkGLM-5.1Kimi K2.7 Code
SimpleBench55.1%57.9%
CritPt4.6%10%
Chess Puzzles19%21%
Epoch Capabilities Index149.84149.97
NYT Connections (extended)77.7%—
Thematic Generalization69.8%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1472—
Surface Evolver Bench—48.8%

Math Kimi K2.7 Code leads

GLM-5.1: 49.7 (#60), Kimi K2.7 Code: 52.9 (#48)

BenchmarkGLM-5.1Kimi K2.7 Code
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)36.8%54%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202593.3%95.6%
FrontierMath Tier 4—12.2%
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions67.1%—
ProofBench22.2%—
LMArena Math1473—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)33.4%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)12.5%—

Knowledge GLM-5.1 leads

GLM-5.1: 54.9 (#50), Kimi K2.7 Code: 53.5 (#57)

BenchmarkGLM-5.1Kimi K2.7 Code
GPQA Diamond89.9%87.9%
SimpleQA Verified34%36.5%
LMArena Expert1476—

Multilingual Not comparable

GLM-5.1: 55.0 (#36), Kimi K2.7 Code: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.1Kimi K2.7 Code
LMArena Non-English1447—
LMArena Chinese1515—
LMArena French1474—
LMArena German1465—
LMArena Japanese1434—
LMArena Korean1418—
LMArena Russian1454—
LMArena Spanish1469—

Instruction Following Not comparable

GLM-5.1: 76.3 (#42), Kimi K2.7 Code: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.1Kimi K2.7 Code
LMArena Instruction Following1451—

Long Context Not comparable

GLM-5.1: 44.9 (#53), Kimi K2.7 Code: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.1Kimi K2.7 Code
LMArena Longer Query1466—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

GLM-5.1: 66.9 (#31), Kimi K2.7 Code: —

BenchmarkGLM-5.1Kimi K2.7 Code
LMArena Text1461—
LMArena Creative Writing1453—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1592—
LMArena Multi-Turn1472—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-5.1 better than Kimi K2.7 Code?

GLM-5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.8 to 43.3 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, GLM-5.1 or Kimi K2.7 Code?

Kimi K2.7 Code is cheaper. It lists at $0.95 per million input tokens and $4 per million output tokens; GLM-5.1 lists at $1.40 and $4.40.

Is GLM-5.1 or Kimi K2.7 Code better for coding?

GLM-5.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 48.7 versus 42.9 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Kimi K2.7 Code does, with 262K tokens against 200K.

How many benchmarks do GLM-5.1 and Kimi K2.7 Code share?

15 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5.1 has 41 scored results on Noometry and Kimi K2.7 Code has 19.

Related comparisons

Go deeper