Verdict
GLM-5.2 leads 9–3 across 12 shared benchmarks.
GLM-5.2 9 · Kimi K2.6 3 · higher isn't always better — check the caveats below.
Reported scores — protocols may differ. How we compare
Math: Evenly split 1–1 across 2 shared math benchmarks (largest gap: OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025, 96.11 vs 86.38 — single evaluator).
Reasoning: Evenly split 1–1 across 2 shared reasoning benchmarks (largest gap: GPQA diamond, 89.14 vs 87.71 — single evaluator).
Unknown: GLM-5.2 leads 2–0 across 2 shared unknown benchmarks (largest gap: ProofBench, 35 vs 16 — single evaluator).
Vendor claims — compare against the measured scores above. A claim is what a developer says about its own model, not an independent measurement.
Coding
“Advanced Coding with Flexible Effort: Stronger coding capabilities with multiple thinking effort levels to balance performance and latency”
Context Handling
“We propose IndexShare, which reuses the same indexer across every four sparse attention layers, reducing per-token FLOPs by 2.9x at a 1M context length.”
General
“Pure Open: An MIT open-source license - no regional limits, technical access without borders”
No vendor claims on file for Kimi K2.6.
GLM-5.2 leads 9–3 across 12 shared benchmarks. GLM-5.2 leads 9 benchmarks and Kimi K2.6 leads 3. Higher isn't always better — see the integrity caveats on each benchmark.
GLM-5.2 and Kimi K2.6 have 12 benchmarks in common in our data — those are the only rows where a direct, apples-to-apples comparison is drawn.
GLM-5.2 leads unknown 2–0.