GLM-5.1 vs Kimi K2.6

Verdict

Kimi K2.6 leads 7–2 across 9 shared benchmarks.

GLM-5.1 2 · Kimi K2.6 7 · higher isn't always better — check the caveats below.

Per-benchmark head-to-head

Reported scores — protocols may differ. How we compare

Sort

GLM-5.1Kimi K2.6

14.77
AChess Puzzles
22.14
4.57
ACritPt
8
18.1
AExploitBench
18.4
86.53
BGPQA diamond
87.71
93.33
AOTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025
96.11
22.22
AProofBench
16
37.29
ASimpleQA Verified
38.7
74.17
BSWE-Bench verified
76.65
57.1
AWeirdML
55.86

Capabilities

Reasoning

Reasoning: Kimi K2.6 leads 2–0 across 2 shared reasoning benchmarks (largest gap: SimpleQA Verified, 38.7 vs 37.29 — single evaluator).

4 reproduced

A higher score does not always mean a better model. Each number is task performance under a disclosed harness. Of the 18 measurements across 9 shared benchmarks, 18 single-evaluator or undisclosed-protocol reports; 56% are independently reproduced. GLM-5.1 and Kimi K2.6 pricing is cross-check disputed — weigh cost claims with the same caution as benchmark wins. Check any benchmark's integrity grade before reading a win as decisive.

Frequently asked questions

Kimi K2.6 leads 7–2 across 9 shared benchmarks. GLM-5.1 leads 2 benchmarks and Kimi K2.6 leads 7. Higher isn't always better — see the integrity caveats on each benchmark.

GLM-5.1 and Kimi K2.6 have 9 benchmarks in common in our data — those are the only rows where a direct, apples-to-apples comparison is drawn.

Kimi K2.6 leads reasoning 2–0.

Follow the record

These models

Same tier

GLM-5.1 vs …

Kimi K2.6 vs …

Frequently asked questions

Kimi K2.6 leads 7–2 across 9 shared benchmarks. GLM-5.1 leads 2 benchmarks and Kimi K2.6 leads 7. Higher isn't always better — see the integrity caveats on each benchmark.

GLM-5.1 and Kimi K2.6 have 9 benchmarks in common in our data — those are the only rows where a direct, apples-to-apples comparison is drawn.

Kimi K2.6 leads reasoning 2–0.