Compare · ModelsLive · 3 picked · head to head

Kimi K2.5 vs GLM 5 vs Step 3.5 Flash

Side by side · benchmarks, pricing, and signals you can act on.

Winner summary

Kimi K2.5 wins 14 of 22 shared benchmarks. Leads in math · knowledge · language.

Category leads
math·Kimi K2.5knowledge·Kimi K2.5language·Kimi K2.5coding·GLM 5speed·Kimi K2.5reasoning·Kimi K2.5arena·GLM 5
Hype vs Reality
Kimi K2.5
#87 by perf·no signal
QUIET
GLM 5
#55 by perf·#27 by attention
UNDERRATED
Step 3.5 Flash
#9 by perf·#11 by attention
DESERVED
Best value
8.4x better value than GLM 5
Kimi K2.5
42.6 pts/$
$1.22/M
GLM 5
45.7 pts/$
$1.26/M
Step 3.5 Flash
384.5 pts/$
$0.20/M
Vendor risk
One or more vendors flagged
moonshotai logo
moonshotai
private · undisclosed
Unknown
z-ai logo
z-ai
private · undisclosed
Unknown
stepfun logo
StepFun
$5.0B·Tier 1
Higher risk
Head to head
Kimi K2.5GLM 5Step 3.5 Flash
OpenCompass · AIME2025
GLM 5 leads by +0.1
Kimi K2.5
91.9
GLM 5
95.8
Step 3.5 Flash
95.7
OpenCompass · GPQA-Diamond
Kimi K2.5 leads by +2.8
Kimi K2.5
88.1
GLM 5
85.3
Step 3.5 Flash
83.7
OpenCompass · HLE
Kimi K2.5 leads by +0.5
Kimi K2.5
28.6
GLM 5
28.1
Step 3.5 Flash
21.6
OpenCompass · IFEval
Kimi K2.5 leads by +0.7
Kimi K2.5
93.9
GLM 5
93.2
Step 3.5 Flash
93.2
OpenCompass · LiveCodeBenchV6
GLM 5 leads by +2.3
Kimi K2.5
80.6
GLM 5
86.2
Step 3.5 Flash
83.9
OpenCompass · MMLU-Pro
Kimi K2.5 leads by +1.0
Kimi K2.5
86.2
GLM 5
85.2
Step 3.5 Flash
83.5
Artificial Analysis · Agentic Index
Kimi K2.5 leads by +6.9
Artificial Analysis Agentic Index · a composite score measuring how well a model performs in agentic workflows · multi-step tool use, planning, error recovery, and autonomous task completion. Aggregates results from multiple agentic benchmarks including SWE-bench, tool-use tests, and planning evaluations. The canonical single-number metric for "how good is this model as an agent?"
Kimi K2.5
58.9
Step 3.5 Flash
52.0
Artificial Analysis · Coding Index
Kimi K2.5 leads by +7.9
Artificial Analysis Coding Index · a composite score that aggregates performance across multiple coding benchmarks into a single index. Tracks code generation quality, debugging ability, multi-language competence, and real-world software engineering tasks. Used by Artificial Analysis to rank model coding capability in a normalized, comparable format. Useful for developers choosing between models for coding-heavy workloads.
Kimi K2.5
39.5
Step 3.5 Flash
31.6
Artificial Analysis · Quality Index
Kimi K2.5 leads by +9.0
Kimi K2.5
46.8
Step 3.5 Flash
37.8
ARC-AGI
Kimi K2.5 leads by +20.7
ARC-AGI · the original Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus, testing whether AI can solve novel visual pattern recognition tasks without memorization.
Kimi K2.5
65.3
GLM 5
44.7
ARC-AGI-2
Kimi K2.5 leads by +7.0
ARC-AGI-2 · the second iteration of the Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus, testing novel pattern recognition and abstract reasoning without prior training data.
Kimi K2.5
11.8
GLM 5
4.9
Chatbot Arena Elo · Overall
GLM 5 leads by +64.2
GLM 5
1455.6
Step 3.5 Flash
1391.4
Chess Puzzles
Kimi K2.5 leads by +2.0
Chess Puzzles · tests strategic and tactical reasoning by having models solve chess puzzle positions, evaluating lookahead and pattern recognition abilities.
Kimi K2.5
12.0
GLM 5
10.0
FrontierMath-2025-02-28-Private
Kimi K2.5 leads by +11.5
FrontierMath (Feb 2025) · original research-level math problems created by mathematicians, testing capabilities at the boundary of current AI mathematical reasoning.
Kimi K2.5
27.9
GLM 5
16.4
FrontierMath-Tier-4-2025-07-01-Private
Kimi K2.5 leads by +2.1
FrontierMath Tier 4 (Jul 2025) · the most challenging tier of frontier mathematics, containing problems that push the absolute limits of AI mathematical reasoning.
Kimi K2.5
4.2
GLM 5
2.1
GPQA diamond
GLM 5 leads by +0.3
Graduate-Level Google-Proof QA (Diamond set) · expert-crafted questions in physics, biology, and chemistry that are difficult even for domain PhDs.
Kimi K2.5
83.5
GLM 5
83.8
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025
Kimi K2.5 leads by +12.2
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 · simulated American Invitational Mathematics Examination problems testing advanced problem-solving skills.
Kimi K2.5
92.2
GLM 5
80.0
PostTrainBench
GLM 5 leads by +3.6
Kimi K2.5
10.3
GLM 5
13.9
SimpleBench
GLM 5 leads by +7.7
SimpleBench · tests fundamental reasoning capabilities with straightforward problems designed to expose gaps in basic logical and spatial thinking.
Kimi K2.5
36.2
GLM 5
43.8
SWE-Bench verified
Kimi K2.5 leads by +1.7
SWE-bench Verified · 500 human-validated tasks from 12 real Python repositories (Django, Flask, scikit-learn, sympy, and others). Each task requires the model to produce a git patch that resolves a real GitHub issue and passes the test suite. The verified subset eliminates ambiguous tasks from the original SWE-bench. Claude Mythos Preview leads at 93.9%, crossing 90% for the first time in 2026. Opus 4.6 scores 80.8%. The benchmark remains the most-cited evaluation for code-generation capability.
Kimi K2.5
73.8
GLM 5
72.1
Terminal Bench
GLM 5 leads by +9.2
Terminal-Bench 2.0 · evaluates AI agents on real terminal-based coding tasks · writing scripts, debugging, running tests, and managing projects entirely through command-line interaction. Tests both code quality and terminal fluency. Claude Opus 4.7 scores 69.4%, demonstrating significant agentic terminal competence.
Kimi K2.5
43.2
GLM 5
52.4
WeirdML
GLM 5 leads by +2.6
WeirdML · tests models on unusual and adversarial machine learning tasks that require creative problem-solving beyond standard patterns.
Kimi K2.5
45.6
GLM 5
48.2
Full benchmark table
BenchmarkKimi K2.5GLM 5Step 3.5 Flash
OpenCompass · AIME2025
91.995.895.7
OpenCompass · GPQA-Diamond
88.185.383.7
OpenCompass · HLE
28.628.121.6
OpenCompass · IFEval
93.993.293.2
OpenCompass · LiveCodeBenchV6
80.686.283.9
OpenCompass · MMLU-Pro
86.285.283.5
Artificial Analysis · Agentic Index
Artificial Analysis Agentic Index · a composite score measuring how well a model performs in agentic workflows · multi-step tool use, planning, error recovery, and autonomous task completion. Aggregates results from multiple agentic benchmarks including SWE-bench, tool-use tests, and planning evaluations. The canonical single-number metric for "how good is this model as an agent?"
58.952.0
Artificial Analysis · Coding Index
Artificial Analysis Coding Index · a composite score that aggregates performance across multiple coding benchmarks into a single index. Tracks code generation quality, debugging ability, multi-language competence, and real-world software engineering tasks. Used by Artificial Analysis to rank model coding capability in a normalized, comparable format. Useful for developers choosing between models for coding-heavy workloads.
39.531.6
Artificial Analysis · Quality Index
46.837.8
ARC-AGI
ARC-AGI · the original Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus, testing whether AI can solve novel visual pattern recognition tasks without memorization.
65.344.7
ARC-AGI-2
ARC-AGI-2 · the second iteration of the Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus, testing novel pattern recognition and abstract reasoning without prior training data.
11.84.9
Chatbot Arena Elo · Overall
1455.61391.4
Chess Puzzles
Chess Puzzles · tests strategic and tactical reasoning by having models solve chess puzzle positions, evaluating lookahead and pattern recognition abilities.
12.010.0
FrontierMath-2025-02-28-Private
FrontierMath (Feb 2025) · original research-level math problems created by mathematicians, testing capabilities at the boundary of current AI mathematical reasoning.
27.916.4
FrontierMath-Tier-4-2025-07-01-Private
FrontierMath Tier 4 (Jul 2025) · the most challenging tier of frontier mathematics, containing problems that push the absolute limits of AI mathematical reasoning.
4.22.1
GPQA diamond
Graduate-Level Google-Proof QA (Diamond set) · expert-crafted questions in physics, biology, and chemistry that are difficult even for domain PhDs.
83.583.8
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 · simulated American Invitational Mathematics Examination problems testing advanced problem-solving skills.
92.280.0
PostTrainBench
10.313.9
SimpleBench
SimpleBench · tests fundamental reasoning capabilities with straightforward problems designed to expose gaps in basic logical and spatial thinking.
36.243.8
SWE-Bench verified
SWE-bench Verified · 500 human-validated tasks from 12 real Python repositories (Django, Flask, scikit-learn, sympy, and others). Each task requires the model to produce a git patch that resolves a real GitHub issue and passes the test suite. The verified subset eliminates ambiguous tasks from the original SWE-bench. Claude Mythos Preview leads at 93.9%, crossing 90% for the first time in 2026. Opus 4.6 scores 80.8%. The benchmark remains the most-cited evaluation for code-generation capability.
73.872.1
Terminal Bench
Terminal-Bench 2.0 · evaluates AI agents on real terminal-based coding tasks · writing scripts, debugging, running tests, and managing projects entirely through command-line interaction. Tests both code quality and terminal fluency. Claude Opus 4.7 scores 69.4%, demonstrating significant agentic terminal competence.
43.252.4
WeirdML
WeirdML · tests models on unusual and adversarial machine learning tasks that require creative problem-solving beyond standard patterns.
45.648.2
Pricing · per 1M tokens · projected $/mo at 10M tokens
ModelInputOutputContextProjected $/mo
moonshotai logoKimi K2.5$0.44$2.00262K tokens (~131 books)$8.30
z-ai logoGLM 5$0.60$1.92203K tokens (~101 books)$9.30
stepfun logoStep 3.5 Flash$0.10$0.30262K tokens (~131 books)$1.50