Skip to main content

Model comparison

GLM-4.7 vs Kimi K2.7 Code

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 16 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

60.39/100
Margin
6.4pts
← winning
Moonshot AI
54.03/100
0 category wins0 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: GLM-4.7 #46 (Supported); Kimi K2.7 Code #92 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. GLM-4.7 and Kimi K2.7 Code share 16 comparable benchmark results. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 14 results are unique to GLM-4.7; 7 to Kimi K2.7 Code.

Updated July 27, 2026
Shared results
16
GLM-4.7 only
14
Kimi K2.7 Code only
7
Comparable categories
0 / 8

Benchmark data for GLM-4.7 and Kimi K2.7 Code is coming soon on BenchLM.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 16 shared benchmark results across 6 evidence categories; 0 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

BenchLM has partial data for these models, but not enough overlapping benchmark coverage to produce a fair score-level comparison yet.

Kimi K2.7 Code is priced at $0.95 input / $4.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for GLM-4.7. Kimi K2.7 Code has the larger context window at 256K, compared with 200K for GLM-4.7.

Category breakdown

Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.

Category scores and score margins for GLM-4.7 and Kimi K2.7 Code
CategoryGLM-4.7ΔKimi K2.7 Code
AgenticGLM-4.745.7MarginNo overlapKimi K2.7 CodeNot measured
CodingGLM-4.775.4MarginNo overlapKimi K2.7 CodeNot measured
KnowledgeGLM-4.751.8MarginNo overlapKimi K2.7 CodeNot measured
MathGLM-4.71.8MarginNo overlapKimi K2.7 CodeNot measured

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

MetricGLM-4.7Kimi K2.7 CodeComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensGLM-4.7$0 input / $0 outputKimi K2.7 Code$0.95 input / $4 outputGLM-4.7 has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per secondGLM-4.782 tok/sKimi K2.7 CodeNot availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenGLM-4.71.10 sKimi K2.7 CodeNot availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensGLM-4.7200KKimi K2.7 Code256KKimi K2.7 Code lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Kimi K2.7 CodeResult
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 41%Not comparable
BrowseCompSource 52%Not comparable
VITA-BenchSource 15.5%Not comparable
AA Agentic IndexSource 25.4%29.6%Kimi K2.7 Code leads
τ²-bench resultsSource 95.9%90.1%GLM-4.7 leads
Gert LabsSource 39.95%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 33.3%34.3%Kimi K2.7 Code leads
GDPval-AASource 11661186Kimi K2.7 Code leads
Kimi Claw 24/7Source 46.9%Not comparable
MCP AtlasSource 76%Not comparable
MCP Mark VerifiedSource 81.1%Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Kimi K2.7 CodeResult
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 73.8%Not comparable
LiveCodeBenchSource 84.9%Not comparable
SWE-RebenchSource 58.7%Not comparable
AA Coding IndexSource 45.3%60.8%Kimi K2.7 Code leads
AA-SciCodeSource 45.1%47.5%Kimi K2.7 Code leads
AA LiveCodeBenchSource 89.4%Not comparable
Kimi Code Bench v2Source 62.0%Not comparable
ProgramBenchSource 53.6%Not comparable
MLS-Bench LiteSource 35.1%Not comparable
cursorBench32Source 49.7%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Kimi K2.7 CodeResult
AA-LCRSource 64.0%66.3%Kimi K2.7 Code leads
CritPtSource 1.7%10.0%Kimi K2.7 Code leads
Knowledge
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Kimi K2.7 CodeResult
GPQASource 85.7%Not comparable
MMLU-ProSource 84.3%Not comparable
HLESource 24.8%Not comparable
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 33.7%42.0%Kimi K2.7 Code leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 85.9%89.6%Kimi K2.7 Code leads
AA-HLESource 25.1%32.8%Kimi K2.7 Code leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -34.6%-10.7%Kimi K2.7 Code leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 29.3%38.6%Kimi K2.7 Code leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 90.3%80.3%Kimi K2.7 Code leads
Math
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Kimi K2.7 CodeResult
AIME 2025Source 95.7%Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 2.439%Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source 0.000%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Kimi K2.7 CodeResult
Design Arena WebsiteSource 12511300Kimi K2.7 Code leads
Inst. Following
BenchmarkGLM-4.7Kimi K2.7 CodeResult
AA-IFBenchSource 67.9%63.1%GLM-4.7 leads
Frequently Asked Questions (3)

Can I compare GLM-4.7 and Kimi K2.7 Code on BenchLM yet?

Not fully yet. BenchLM is tracking both models, but the sourced benchmark breakdown for this comparison is still coming soon.

Why does this comparison show “coming soon”?

BenchLM only shows category winners and benchmark-level calls when we have sourced results that can be compared fairly. For these models, the public benchmark coverage is not complete enough yet.

What data is available for GLM-4.7 and Kimi K2.7 Code today?

GLM-4.7: $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens Kimi K2.7 Code: $0.95 input / $4.00 output per 1M tokens Both model pages still include creator, context window, reasoning mode, and other metadata while benchmark coverage fills in.

Self-host vs API cost

Estimates at 50,000 req/day · 1000 tokens/req average.

GLM-4.7
API / mo$0
Self-host / moNot listed
Break-even
Proprietary model — self-hosting not applicable.
Kimi K2.7 Code
API / mo$3,713
Self-host / mo$18,221
Break-even326M/day
Model the full break-even

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 27, 2026

Know when it’s worth switching models

The model to choose, the cheaper alternative, and the release we would wait on.

One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.