Kimi K2.5 vs GLM 5.2
MoonshotAI's native multimodal model with state-of-the-art visual coding.
Z.ai's frontier reasoning model for long-context agents and software engineering.
No captured outputs for these models yet.
Frequently Asked Questions: Kimi K2.5 vs GLM 5.2▼
Which is better, Kimi K2.5 or GLM 5.2?
▼
Based on the Capability Index, GLM 5.2 scores higher (83.4 vs 80.3). However, "better" depends on your use case — pricing, speed, context window, and specific capability needs all matter.
Which is cheaper, Kimi K2.5 or GLM 5.2?
▼
Kimi K2.5 has a lower blended cost. Kimi K2.5: $0.38 input / $2.02 output. GLM 5.2: $1.40 input / $4.40 output.
Which has a larger context window, Kimi K2.5 or GLM 5.2?
▼
GLM 5.2 has a larger context window: Kimi K2.5 supports 256K tokens vs GLM 5.2 at 262K tokens.
Do both Kimi K2.5 and GLM 5.2 support vision?
▼
Kimi K2.5 supports vision/image input, but GLM 5.2 does not.
Which has better coding performance, Kimi K2.5 or GLM 5.2?
▼
GLM 5.2 scores higher on SWE-bench Verified: Kimi K2.5 resolves 74% vs GLM 5.2 at 79%.
What are the key differences between Kimi K2.5 and GLM 5.2?
▼
Key differences: Kimi K2.5 is significantly cheaper; only Kimi K2.5 supports vision input. Compare full specs on this page.
Which model should I choose for my use case?
▼
If cost is your priority, choose the cheaper option. If you need the highest intelligence for complex tasks, pick the higher-scoring model. For long documents or codebases, choose the larger context window. You can try both Kimi K2.5 and GLM 5.2 for free on idapt.app to see which performs better for your specific needs.