Skip to content

Kimi K2 0905 vs GLM 5.2

Kimi K2 0905

Moonshot AI

52#170
vs
GLM 5.2

Zhipu AI

79#68
Signal-by-Signal Comparison
SignalKimi K2 0905DeltaGLM 5.2
Capabilities
50
-17
67
Benchmarks
51
-30
81
Pricing
98
0
98
Context window size
86
-9
96
Recency
73
-27
100
Output Capacity
83
-2
85
Overall Result
0 wins
of 6
6 wins
GLM 5.2 wins 6 of 6 signals

Score History

Score History (24 data points)
Kimi K2 0905GLM 5.2
Kimi K2 0905

52.4

current score

Leader

GLM 5.2

right now

GLM 5.2

78.5

current score

LMMarketCap.com
Interactive Price Comparison
100Kcalls/month
1,000tokens (~1,333 chars)
500tokens (~667 chars)

Kimi K2 0905

Moonshot AI

Best Value
Per request$0.001850
Daily$6.17
Monthly$185.00
Annual$2220.00

GLM 5.2

Zhipu AI

Per request$0.001890
Daily$6.30
Monthly$189.00
Annual$2268.00

Kimi K2 0905 saves you $4.00/month

That's $48.00/year compared to GLM 5.2 at your current usage level of 100K calls/month.

2% cheaper
Choose Kimi K2 0905 for cost optimization

Kimi K2 0905 pricing:
Input:$0.60/M tokens
Output:$2.50/M tokens
GLM 5.2 pricing:
Input:$0.73/M tokens
Output:$2.31/M tokens
Kimi K2 0905

Moonshot AI

52

Composite Score

Winner
GLM 5.2

Zhipu AI

79

Composite Score

Signal-by-Signal Comparison
MetricKimi K2 0905GLM 5.2Winner
Overall Score
52
79
GLM 5.2
Rank#170#68
GLM 5.2
Quality Rank#170#68
GLM 5.2
Adoption Rank#170#68
GLM 5.2
Parameters------
Context Window262K1049K
GLM 5.2
Pricing$0.60/$2.50/M$0.73/$2.31/M--
Signal Scores
Capabilities
50
67
GLM 5.2
Benchmarks
51
81
GLM 5.2
Pricing
98
98
GLM 5.2
Context window size
86
96
GLM 5.2
Recency
73
100
GLM 5.2
Output Capacity
83
85
GLM 5.2
Benchmark Head-to-Head(3 benchmarks)
Kimi K2: 0GLM 5.2: 0
Kimi K2
GLM 5.2
Normalized 0-100%
MMLU-Pro
-86%
SWE-bench Verified
63.4%-
Arena Elo
-1457
Benchmark Interpretation

Our score (0-100) is driven by benchmark performance (90%) from Arena Elo ratings, MMLU, GPQA, HumanEval, SWE-bench, and 15+ standardized evaluations. Capabilities and context window serve as tiebreakers (10%). Learn more about our methodology.

Kimi K2 0905Competitive

Scores 52/100 (rank #170), placing it in the top 42% of all 290 models tracked.

Raw Quality0/100
Cost Efficiency0/100
Speed0/100
GLM 5.2Strong Performer

Scores 79/100 (rank #68), placing it in the top 77% of all 290 models tracked.

Raw Quality0/100
Cost Efficiency0/100
Speed0/100

GLM 5.2 has a 26-point advantage, which typically translates to noticeably stronger performance on complex reasoning, code generation, and multi-step tasks.

When to Use Each Model

Choose Kimi K2 0905 when you need:

  • Self-hosted deployments where you need full control over the model

Choose GLM 5.2 when you need:

  • Processing long documents or large codebases (1049K token context)
  • Step-by-step reasoning and chain-of-thought problem solving
  • Self-hosted deployments where you need full control over the model
Cost-Performance Analysis
Kimi K2 0905
Input cost$0.60/M tokens
Output cost$2.50/M tokens
Cost per quality point$0.059
Est. monthly (1M tokens/day)$46.50
GLM 5.2Best Value
Input cost$0.73/M tokens
Output cost$2.31/M tokens
Cost per quality point$0.039
Est. monthly (1M tokens/day)$45.67

Both models are priced similarly, so the decision comes down to quality and features rather than cost.

Latency & Speed
Kimi K2 0905Faster
Speed score0/100
GLM 5.2
Speed score0/100

Both models have comparable response speeds. For most applications, the latency difference is negligible.

When latency matters most: Interactive chatbots, IDE code completion, real-time translation, and user-facing applications where response time directly impacts experience. For batch processing, background summarization, or offline analysis, latency is less critical.

Example Use Cases

Code generation & review

Based on overall model capabilities and architecture for coding tasks like generating functions, debugging, and refactoring

Kimi K2 0905

Customer support chatbot

Suitable for user-facing chat with competitive response times. GLM 5.2 also offers lower per-token costs for high-volume support

Kimi K2 0905

Long document analysis

Larger context window (1049K tokens) can process longer documents, contracts, and research papers in a single pass

GLM 5.2

Batch data extraction

Lower output pricing ($2.31/M) reduces costs when processing thousands of records daily

GLM 5.2

Creative writing & content

Higher overall composite score (79/100) correlates with better nuance, coherence, and style in long-form content

GLM 5.2
Which Should You Choose?
Our recommendation:
GLM 5.2

GLM 5.2 clearly outperforms Kimi K2 0905 with a significant 26.1-point lead. For most general use cases, GLM 5.2 is the stronger choice. However, Kimi K2 0905 may still excel in niche scenarios.

by Moonshot AI

  • Choose for Quality - Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
  • Choose for Reliability - Higher uptime and faster response speeds
  • Choose for Prototyping - Stronger community support and better developer experience
  • Choose for Production - Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale
GLM 5.2
Recommended

by Zhipu AI

  • Choose for Cost - 2% lower pricing; better value at scale
Capability Comparison
CapabilityKimi K2 0905GLM 5.2
Vision (Image Input)
Function Calling
Streaming
JSON Mode
Reasoningdiffers
Web Search
Image Output
Monthly Cost Calculator
1,000tokens (600 in / 400 out)
100requests/day (3,000/month)

Kimi K2 0905

Moonshot AI

Best Value
$4.08
estimated monthly cost

GLM 5.2

Zhipu AI

$4.09
estimated monthly cost

Kimi K2 0905 saves you $0.0150/month

That's 0% cheaper than GLM 5.2 at 1,000 tokens/request and 100 requests/day.

Assumes 60% input / 40% output token ratio per request. Actual costs may vary based on your usage pattern.

Parameters & Context
ParameterKimi K2 0905GLM 5.2
Context Window262K1.0M
Max Output Tokens100,352131,072
Open SourceYesYes
CreatedSep 4, 2025Jun 16, 2026
Last updated: 1h ago

Related comparisons

Kimi K2 0905 vs GLM 5.2 (2026) | LM Market Cap