GLM 5.1 vs Kimi K2.7 Code

Z.ai · China  |  Moonshot AI · China · Updated June 2026

Quick verdict

Pick GLM 5.1 for long-horizon autonomous agentic engineering (up to 8-hour runs) or state-of-the-art open-weight coding (topped swe-bench pro at launch). Pick Kimi K2.7 Code for long-horizon agentic software engineering or token-efficient reasoning (~30% fewer than k2.6). On a tight budget at scale, Kimi K2.7 Code is the value pick.

GLM 5.1 (Z.ai) and Kimi K2.7 Code (Moonshot AI) are two of the models people most often weigh against each other in 2026. GLM 5.1 is an open-weight (MIT) Chinese coding model built for long-horizon agentic engineering, topping SWE-Bench Pro at launch while running autonomously for up to 8 hours. Kimi K2.7 Code is moonshot AI's open-weight 1T-parameter MoE model (32B active) tuned for long-horizon agentic coding, always reasoning yet ~30% more token-efficient than K2.6. They diverge most on price and context window — each quantified below from the models' real specs.

Key differences at a glance

Side-by-side specs

SpecGLM 5.1Kimi K2.7 Code
ProviderZ.ai (China) Moonshot AI (China)
ReleasedApril 7, 2026 June 12, 2026
Context window200K (~300 pages) 256K (~393 pages)
Price (in/out)$1.4/$4.4 per 1M tokens $0.95/$4 per 1M tokens
Open weight?Yes — self-hostable Yes — self-hostable
Modalitiestext, code text, image, video, code
SWE-Bench VerifiedNot published Not published
MRCR v2 @ 1MNot published Not published

Who wins what

Long-horizon autonomous agentic engineering (up to 8-hour runs)

GLM 5.1

A core design strength of GLM 5.1.

State-of-the-art open-weight coding (topped SWE-Bench Pro at launch)

GLM 5.1

A core design strength of GLM 5.1.

Sustained tool use across thousands of calls

GLM 5.1

A core design strength of GLM 5.1.

Long-horizon agentic software engineering

Kimi K2.7 Code

A core design strength of Kimi K2.7 Code.

Token-efficient reasoning (~30% fewer than K2.6)

Kimi K2.7 Code

A core design strength of Kimi K2.7 Code.

Open-weight 1T MoE, self-hostable

Kimi K2.7 Code

A core design strength of Kimi K2.7 Code.

Lowest cost at scale

Kimi K2.7 Code

At $0.95/$4 per 1M tokens, it is the cheaper of the two — the gap dominates the bill on high-volume workloads.

Largest single-prompt input

Kimi K2.7 Code

Its 256K window is about 1.3× larger, fitting roughly 393 pages in one prompt.

Which should you pick?

A cost-sensitive startup shipping high volume

Kimi K2.7 Code

At $0.95/$4 per 1M tokens it undercuts GLM 5.1, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.

Someone analysing very long documents or codebases

Kimi K2.7 Code

Larger 256K window fits more in one prompt.

Anyone whose priority is long-horizon autonomous agentic engineering (up to 8-hour runs)

GLM 5.1

It is specifically built for that.

Anyone whose priority is long-horizon agentic software engineering

Kimi K2.7 Code

That is its strongest area.

GLM 5.1: where it fits

An open-weight (MIT) Chinese coding model built for long-horizon agentic engineering, topping SWE-Bench Pro at launch while running autonomously for up to 8 hours. Released April 7, 2026 by Z.ai, it is built for long-horizon autonomous agentic engineering (up to 8-hour runs), state-of-the-art open-weight coding (topped SWE-Bench Pro at launch), sustained tool use across thousands of calls, and self-hostable under a permissive MIT license.

Its trade-offs are real: text-only, with no image, audio, or video input, and 754B-parameter MoE demands heavy GPU resources to self-host. At $1.4 in / $4.4 out per million tokens, it sits in the mid price band.

Kimi K2.7 Code: where it fits

Moonshot AI's open-weight 1T-parameter MoE model (32B active) tuned for long-horizon agentic coding, always reasoning yet ~30% more token-efficient than K2.6. Released June 12, 2026 by Moonshot AI, it is built for long-horizon agentic software engineering, token-efficient reasoning (~30% fewer than K2.6), open-weight 1T MoE, self-hostable, and multi-turn tool use with preserved reasoning.

Its trade-offs: only self-reported benchmarks; no SWE-Bench Verified, and thinking mode and sampling params can't be disabled. At $0.95 in / $4 out per million tokens, it sits in the budget price band.

The bottom line for this matchup

GLM 5.1 and Kimi K2.7 Code overlap enough that the right pick depends on your specific job. Kimi K2.7 Code costs less per token; Kimi K2.7 Code holds the larger context; and each leads in its own area — GLM 5.1 for long-horizon autonomous agentic engineering (up to 8-hour runs), Kimi K2.7 Code for long-horizon agentic software engineering. Rather than crowning one, run the same hard task through both once and let the results decide.

Want both GLM 5.1 and Kimi K2.7 Code without two subscriptions? LumiChats gives you these plus 40+ models under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day) — draft with one, cross-check with the other.

See pricing

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM 5.1 or Kimi K2.7 Code better for coding?

Public SWE-Bench figures are not available for either model, so the honest test is your own repository — run an identical real bug through both. By design, GLM 5.1 leans toward long-horizon autonomous agentic engineering (up to 8-hour runs) while Kimi K2.7 Code leans toward long-horizon agentic software engineering, and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.

Which is cheaper, GLM 5.1 or Kimi K2.7 Code?

Kimi K2.7 Code is cheaper — $1.4/$4.4 per 1M tokens vs $0.95/$4 per 1M tokens, roughly 1.5× apart on input.

Which has the bigger context window?

Kimi K2.7 Code — 256K vs 200K, about 1.3× larger. Useful only if the model actually reasons over the full window, which not all do.

Can I use both GLM 5.1 and Kimi K2.7 Code together?

Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you GLM 5.1, Kimi K2.7 Code and 40+ others under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day), so you can draft with one and cross-check with the other instead of buying two subscriptions.

Which is newer, GLM 5.1 or Kimi K2.7 Code?

Kimi K2.7 Code — released June 12, 2026, about 2 months after GLM 5.1.

Related comparisons

Specifications and benchmarks reflect publicly reported figures as of June 2026 and may change as providers release updates. Always verify on your own workload.