# GLM-4.5-Air vs Kimi K2.6

> Kimi K2.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.7 to 38.9 on the Noometry Index. GLM-4.5-Air costs 4.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Kimi K2.6's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/glm-4-5-air-vs-kimi-k2-6
- Last updated: 2026-10-12
- Shared benchmarks: 18

## Summary

- They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.5-Air scores higher in 0 categories and Kimi K2.6 in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Kimi K2.6 leads 57.0 to 36.2.
- GLM-4.5-Air is cheaper at $0.20 / $1.10 per million input/output tokens, against $0.95 / $4 for Kimi K2.6.
- Kimi K2.6 accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 131K.

## Snapshot

| | GLM-4.5-Air | Kimi K2.6 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | Moonshot AI |
| Noometry Index | 38.9 | 47.7 |
| Rank | 177 | 60 |
| Context | 131K | 262K |
| Input $/M | $0.20 | $0.95 |
| Output $/M | $1.10 | $4 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- GLM-4.5-Air: 33.3 (#259)
- Kimi K2.6: 50.7 (#43)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.5-Air | Kimi K2.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1397 | 1488 |
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 76.7% |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1509 |
| SciCode | — | 53.5% |
| GSO | 2.9% | — |
| WeirdML | — | 55.9% |
| ALE-Bench | — | 1,093 |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- GLM-4.5-Air: —
- Kimi K2.6: 21.9 (#137)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.5-Air | Kimi K2.6 |
|---|---|---|
| OSWorld 2.0 | — | 4.6% |
| ExploitBench | — | 18.4% |
| GBAEval | — | 0.9% |
| GDP.pdf | — | 12% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 6,205 |

## Reasoning

- GLM-4.5-Air: 24.1 (#166)
- Kimi K2.6: 40.5 (#55)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.5-Air | Kimi K2.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1379 | 1470 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 43% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 87.2% |
| CritPt | — | 8% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 26% |
| EBR-Bench | — | 2.4% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 18% |
| DTBench | — | 90.9% |
| LMCA | — | 37.3% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 151.05 |
| ForecastBench | 59.2 | — |

## Math

- GLM-4.5-Air: 36.2 (#170)
- Kimi K2.6: 57.0 (#41)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.5-Air | Kimi K2.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1396 | 1475 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 57.2% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 25.6% |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | — | 72.9% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 96.1% |
| ProofBench | — | 16% |
| Omni-MATH | 39.1% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 39% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 14.6% |

## Knowledge

- GLM-4.5-Air: 35.0 (#191)
- Kimi K2.6: 54.0 (#54)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.5-Air | Kimi K2.6 |
|---|---|---|
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 9.3% | 10.8% |
| LMArena Expert | 1370 | 1491 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 90.8% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 8.1% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 34.9% |
| MMLU-Pro | 76.2% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 59.4% | — |

## Multimodal

- GLM-4.5-Air: —
- Kimi K2.6: 31.6 (#103)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.5-Air | Kimi K2.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1283 |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | — | 3.9% |
| Furniture Assembly | — | 21.7% |
| LMArena Document | — | 1451 |

## Multilingual

- GLM-4.5-Air: 49.1 (#135)
- Kimi K2.6: 54.9 (#37)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.5-Air | Kimi K2.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1366 | 1446 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1426 | 1521 |
| LMArena French | 1399 | 1471 |
| LMArena German | 1377 | 1450 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1348 | 1443 |
| LMArena Korean | 1308 | 1427 |
| LMArena Russian | 1373 | 1446 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1386 | 1464 |

## Instruction Following

- GLM-4.5-Air: 69.6 (#171)
- Kimi K2.6: 76.3 (#43)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.5-Air | Kimi K2.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1354 | 1451 |
| IFEval | 81.2% | — |

## Long Context

- GLM-4.5-Air: 41.6 (#135)
- Kimi K2.6: 44.9 (#52)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.5-Air | Kimi K2.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1366 | 1468 |

## Writing & Preference

- GLM-4.5-Air: 55.9 (#139)
- Kimi K2.6: 68.5 (#26)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.5-Air | Kimi K2.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1384 | 1455 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1343 | 1434 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1371 | 1453 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1725 |
| WildBench | 78.9% | — |
| EQ-Bench 4 | — | 1202 |

## FAQ

### Is GLM-4.5-Air better than Kimi K2.6?

Kimi K2.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.7 to 38.9 on the Noometry Index. GLM-4.5-Air costs 4.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Kimi K2.6's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, GLM-4.5-Air or Kimi K2.6?

GLM-4.5-Air is cheaper. It lists at $0.20 per million input tokens and $1.10 per million output tokens; Kimi K2.6 lists at $0.95 and $4.

### Is GLM-4.5-Air or Kimi K2.6 better for coding?

Kimi K2.6 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 50.7 versus 33.3 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Kimi K2.6 does, with 262K tokens against 131K.

### How many benchmarks do GLM-4.5-Air and Kimi K2.6 share?

18 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.5-Air has 27 scored results on Noometry and Kimi K2.6 has 51.