Head-to-head comparison across 3benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
GLM-5.1
84
Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning)
79
Pick GLM-5.1 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority.
Agentic
+10.7 difference
Coding
+18.4 difference
Knowledge
+35.0 difference
GLM-5.1
Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning)
$1.4 / $4.4
$null / $null
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
203K
128K
Pick GLM-5.1 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority.
GLM-5.1 is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 84 to 79. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
GLM-5.1's sharpest advantage is in agentic, where it averages 65.3 against 54.6. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is Terminal-Bench 2.0, 63.5% to 50.8%. Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) does hit back in knowledge, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
GLM-5.1 gives you the larger context window at 203K, compared with 128K for Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning).
GLM-5.1 is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 84 to 79. The biggest single separator in this matchup is Terminal-Bench 2.0, where the scores are 63.5% and 50.8%.
Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 87.3 versus 52.3. GLM-5.1 stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 76.8 versus 58.4. GLM-5.1 stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
GLM-5.1 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 65.3 versus 54.6. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
For engineers, researchers, and the plain curious — a weekly brief on new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.