GLM 5.3 vs Kimi K2.6
GLM 5.3 
Kimi K2.6 Verdict
- GLM 5.3 (max) and Kimi K2.6 are level on quality (60.0 vs 59.4).
- GLM 5.3 (max) is stronger in agents & tools, coding, human preference, maths, reasoning.
- Kimi K2.6 is stronger in knowledge, composite, instruction following, long context, multimodal.
- Kimi K2.6 is 1.3× cheaper ($1.71 vs $2.15 per 1M blended).
- GLM 5.3 (max) streams 1.8× faster (66 vs 36 tokens per second).
| Metric | GLM 5.3 (max) | Kimi K2.6 |
|---|---|---|
| BenchLeader Index | 60.0 | 59.4 |
| Agents & tools score | 52.8 | 44.1 |
| Coding score | 64.3 | 60.3 |
| Human preference score | 68.9 | 60.7 |
| Knowledge score | 55.8 | 57.8 |
| Maths score | 60.0 | 53.8 |
| Reasoning score | 66.9 | 66.0 |
| Composite score | – | 62.6 |
| Instruction following score | – | 70.6 |
| Long context score | – | 64.7 |
| Multimodal score | – | 63.0 |
| Blended price $/M | $2.15 | $1.71 |
| Output speed | 66 tok/s | 36 tok/s |
| Time to first answer | 33.5 s | 126.5 s |
| Context window | 1M | 262k |
| GPQA Diamond | 90.9% | 90.8% |
| FrontierMath Tiers 1–3 | 68.8% | 57.2% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 29.3% | 25.6% |
| OTIS Mock AIME | 91.1% | 96.1% |
| SWE-bench Verified (Epoch) | – | 76.7% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 41.0% | 34.9% |
| Terminal-Bench | 41.8% | – |
| OSWorld-Verified 2.0 | – | 4.6% |
| SciCode | 56.5% | 53.5% |
| WeirdML | 75.4% | 55.9% |
| APEX-Agents | – | 18.9% |
| ProofBench | 49.0% | 16.0% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | – | 151.0 |
| LMArena Text | 1486 | 1461 |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1509 | 1485 |
| LMArena Coding | 1526 | 1514 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1614 | 1509 |
| LMArena Vision | – | 1281 |
| LMArena Agent | 2.6 | – |
| AA Intelligence Index | – | 31.3 |
| IFBench | – | 76.0% |
| AA-LCR | – | 81.0% |
| MMMU-Pro | – | 79.4% |
| AA-Omniscience | – | 5.3 |
| Terminal-Bench Hard | – | 43.9% |
| GPQA Diamond (AA) | – | 91.1% |
| Humanity's Last Exam (AA) | – | 37.5% |
| SciCode (AA) | – | 51.5% |
| τ²-Bench Telecom (AA) | – | 95.9% |
| LiveCodeBench | 80.5% | 86.8% |
| MMLU-Pro | 86.8% | 87.6% |
| IOI | 68.4% | – |
| LegalBench | 84.8% | 84.7% |
| CorpFin | – | 66.7% |
| TaxEval | 72.4% | 74.7% |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals) | 71.5% | 53.6% |
| SWE-bench (Vals) | 95.4% | 76.2% |
| GPQA Diamond (Vals) | 88.1% | 89.1% |
| Vals Index | 57.0 | 43.5 |
| HiL-Bench | – | 18.7% |
| EQ-Bench 4 | – | 1202 |
Data as of 2026-09-13. Best configuration of each model; every score links to its source on the model pages.
GLM 5.3 vs Kimi K2.6: questions
- Is GLM 5.3 better than Kimi K2.6?
- GLM 5.3 (max) and Kimi K2.6 are level on quality (60.0 vs 59.4). The BenchLeader Index combines every independent quality benchmark; GLM 5.3 (max) is ahead overall as of 2026-09-13, but check the category scores for your use.
- Is GLM 5.3 better than Kimi K2.6 for coding?
- GLM 5.3 scores higher in coding (64 vs 60 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Is GLM 5.3 better than Kimi K2.6 for agentic tasks?
- GLM 5.3 scores higher in agentic tasks (53 vs 44 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Which is cheaper, GLM 5.3 or Kimi K2.6?
- Kimi K2.6 is cheaper: $1.71 against $2.15 per million tokens, blended at three input tokens per output token.
- Which is faster, GLM 5.3 or Kimi K2.6?
- GLM 5.3 streams faster: 66 against 36 output tokens per second.
- Which has the larger context window?
- GLM 5.3 accepts more context: 1M against 262k tokens.