Model comparison

GLM-5.2 vs Kimi K2.5 Instant

GLM-5.2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.1 to 43.6 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.

GLM-5.2 Z.ai (Zhipu)

51.1

Rank #44 Confirmed

Kimi K2.5 Instant Moonshot AI

43.6

Rank #89 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-5.2 scores higher in 8 categories and Kimi K2.5 Instant in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where GLM-5.2 leads 57.1 to 40.2.

Side by side

GLM-5.2 and Kimi K2.5 Instant specifications
GLM-5.2Kimi K2.5 Instant
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)Moonshot AI
Noometry Index51.143.6
Released2026-06-13—
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window1M—
Max output131K—
Input $ / M tokens$1.40—
Output $ / M tokens$4.40—
Results tracked5118

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

Category by category

Coding GLM-5.2 leads

GLM-5.2: 51.3 (#41), Kimi K2.5 Instant: 42.6 (#97)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Kimi K2.5 Instant
LMArena WebDev16031404
LMArena Coding14851484
SWE-bench Verified78.7%—
DeepSWE43.8%—
FrontierCode24.5%—
SciCode50.5%—
WeirdML70.1%—
ALE-Bench1,047—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GLM-5.2: 32.4 (#63), Kimi K2.5 Instant: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Kimi K2.5 Instant
APEX-Agents45.2%—
τ²-bench Banking37.1%—
PostTrainBench31.7%—
GBAEval0%—
Vending-Bench 28,314—

Reasoning GLM-5.2 leads

GLM-5.2: 42.3 (#52), Kimi K2.5 Instant: 29.7 (#90)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Kimi K2.5 Instant
LMArena Hard Prompts14801443
ARC-AGI-222.8%—
SimpleBench58.8%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark62.6%—
NYT Connections (extended)74.3%—
ARC-AGI-177%—
CritPt20.9%—
Chess Puzzles21%—
EBR-Bench9.5%—
Mystery Game Puzzles19%—
DTBench93.6%—
LMCA45.8%—
Surface Evolver Bench55.6%—
Epoch Capabilities Index151.78—

Math GLM-5.2 leads

GLM-5.2: 55.7 (#43), Kimi K2.5 Instant: 39.4 (#105)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Kimi K2.5 Instant
LMArena Math14821442
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)59.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 429.3%—
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions67.6%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202586.4%—
ProofBench35%—

Knowledge GLM-5.2 leads

GLM-5.2: 57.1 (#40), Kimi K2.5 Instant: 40.2 (#123)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Kimi K2.5 Instant
LMArena Expert14861440
GPQA Diamond91.9%—
SimpleQA Verified34.2%—

Multimodal Not comparable

GLM-5.2: —, Kimi K2.5 Instant: 40.2 (#50)

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Kimi K2.5 Instant
LMArena Vision—1254

Multilingual GLM-5.2 leads

GLM-5.2: 55.8 (#26), Kimi K2.5 Instant: 52.0 (#94)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Kimi K2.5 Instant
LMArena Non-English14591406
LMArena Chinese15191449
LMArena French14791403
LMArena German14681413
LMArena Korean14451378
LMArena Russian14661404
LMArena Spanish14771447
LMArena Japanese1451—

Instruction Following GLM-5.2 leads

GLM-5.2: 76.9 (#34), Kimi K2.5 Instant: 75.3 (#65)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Kimi K2.5 Instant
LMArena Instruction Following14651430

Long Context GLM-5.2 leads

GLM-5.2: 45.3 (#43), Kimi K2.5 Instant: 43.9 (#83)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Kimi K2.5 Instant
LMArena Longer Query14791435

Writing & Preference GLM-5.2 leads

GLM-5.2: 70.4 (#21), Kimi K2.5 Instant: 60.6 (#95)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-5.2Kimi K2.5 Instant
LMArena Text14701420
LMArena Creative Writing14621381
LMArena Multi-Turn14691427
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1757—
EQ-Bench 41222—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-5.2 better than Kimi K2.5 Instant?

GLM-5.2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.1 to 43.6 on the Noometry Index.

Is GLM-5.2 or Kimi K2.5 Instant better for coding?

GLM-5.2 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 51.3 versus 42.6 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do GLM-5.2 and Kimi K2.5 Instant share?

17 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5.2 has 51 scored results on Noometry and Kimi K2.5 Instant has 18.

Related comparisons

Go deeper