Navigate
AI BENCHY
Advertise here

Kimi K2.6 vs GLM 5.1

The average score is effectively tied at 5.7 vs 5.7. GLM 5.1 has the lower benchmark cost at $0.164 vs $0.230. GLM 5.1 is faster at 6.74s vs 19.57s, with pass rates of 30.3% vs 45.5%.

Last updated at: 2026-08-20

Rank
#203
Total Output Tokens
30,249
Response Time (avg)
19.57s
Total Cost
$0.230
Rank
#202
Total Output Tokens
14,393
Response Time (avg)
6.74s
Total Cost
$0.164
Recommended model GLM 5.1

It has the best score here (5.7), while responding about 2.9x faster than Kimi K2.6.

Detailed comparison

Metric Kimi K2.6 Kimi K2.6 none Release: 2026-04-20 GLM 5.1 GLM 5.1 none Release: 2026-04-07
Score 5.7 5.7
Rank #203 #202
Reliability 10.0 10.0
Consistency 9.3 8.2
Attempts 66/66 66/66
Tests Correct
Attempt pass rate 30.3% 45.5%
Flaky tests 2 5
Total Runs 66 66
Cost per result 3.732 2.073
Total Cost $0.230 $0.164
Input Price $0.941 / 1M $0.966 / 1M
Output Price $3.961 / 1M $3.036 / 1M
Total Input Tokens 116,983 124,219
Output Tokens 30,249 14,393
Reasoning Tokens 0 0
Response Time (avg) 19.57s 6.74s
Response Time (max) 238.89s 61.20s
Response Time (total) 430.58s 148.20s
Parameters 1T total (32B active) 744B total (40B active)
Availability Weights available Open source

Model generation showcase

Hamster playing table tennis

Prompt: Create a detailed SVG illustration of a hamster playing table tennis.

#203 MoonshotAI: Kimi K2.6

none
Cost
$0.020
Time
127.4s
Tokens
4,429 tok

#202 GLM 5.1

none
Invalid SVG
Cost
$0.000
Time
300.0s
Tokens
0 tok

Top Models by Score

Score vs Total Cost

Response Time (avg)

Score vs Response Time (avg)

Total Output Tokens

Score vs Total Output Tokens

Category Breakdown

Coding Score Consistency Attempt pass rate Flaky tests Tests Correct Response Time (avg) Input Tokens Output Tokens Reasoning Tokens
Kimi K2.6 5.5 9.8 33.3% 0 82.57s 5,986 14,754 0
GLM 5.1 3.9 9.7 0.0% 0 4.96s 7,256 525 0

Quick Compare

Switch Comparison Pair