glm-5.2
Checking current pricing…
Chat comparison
glm-5.2vskimi-k2.7-code
Compare the things that matter before you build: current price, capabilities, and latest aggregated LLM7 statistics.
Current pricing
See the cost difference clearly
kimi-k2.7-code
Checking current pricing…
What's different
Only capabilities that differ between these models are listed. Green highlights the broader supported option or larger context window.
Context window
glm-5.2Better fit
976,000 tokens
kimi-k2.7-code
256,000 tokens
Capability scores
AI-estimated ratings on 30 criteria from head-to-head comparisons against 86 other text models in the LLM7 catalog, judged by TypeSafe Jev from public information (2026-10-20). Each score is the win rate against the field, relative to the strongest model for that criterion (100%). Not a benchmark.
Below 50%50–79%80–94%95%+
glm-5.2 · leads in 20
56%
Moderate
kimi-k2.7-code · leads in 8
53%
Moderate
Knowledge & reasoning
General knowledge
glm-5.2Leads50%kimi-k2.7-code37%Logical reasoning
glm-5.257%kimi-k2.7-codeLeads59%Mathematics
glm-5.262%kimi-k2.7-codeLeads68%Scientific and technical depth
glm-5.256%kimi-k2.7-code56%Planning and task decomposition
glm-5.257%kimi-k2.7-codeLeads62%
Coding & tools
Code generation
glm-5.247%kimi-k2.7-codeLeads87%Debugging and code review
glm-5.258%kimi-k2.7-codeLeads88%Agentic coding
glm-5.261%kimi-k2.7-codeLeads81%Tool and function calling
glm-5.255%kimi-k2.7-codeLeads58%SQL and query writing
glm-5.263%kimi-k2.7-codeLeads84%
Writing & language
Creative writing
glm-5.2Leads44%kimi-k2.7-code36%Professional writing
glm-5.2Leads51%kimi-k2.7-code39%Conversational quality
glm-5.2Leads49%kimi-k2.7-code41%Multilingual ability
glm-5.2Leads84%kimi-k2.7-code55%Translation
glm-5.2Leads61%kimi-k2.7-code48%Summarization
glm-5.2Leads57%kimi-k2.7-code48%
Data & professional work
Data analysis
glm-5.2Leads61%kimi-k2.7-code59%Professional domains
glm-5.2Leads53%kimi-k2.7-code43%Information extraction
glm-5.2Leads61%kimi-k2.7-code52%Classification and labeling
glm-5.2Leads61%kimi-k2.7-code44%Long-context handling
glm-5.2Leads67%kimi-k2.7-code52%
Reliability & control
Instruction following
glm-5.2Leads53%kimi-k2.7-code50%Structured output
glm-5.2Leads60%kimi-k2.7-code59%Factual accuracy
glm-5.2Leads50%kimi-k2.7-code44%Safety and alignment
glm-5.2Leads45%kimi-k2.7-code39%Steerability
glm-5.2Leads49%kimi-k2.7-code45%Output consistency
glm-5.2Leads60%kimi-k2.7-code53%
Speed, cost & vision
Response speed
glm-5.2Leads37%kimi-k2.7-code30%Cost efficiency
glm-5.2Leads43%kimi-k2.7-code34%Image understanding
glm-5.2No image inputkimi-k2.7-codeNo image input
Latest LLM7 statistics
Recent aggregated percentages and response-time metrics from LLM7, not a global model benchmark or traffic disclosure.
Recent stability
glm-5.2
99.94%
kimi-k2.7-code
99.83%
Average response time
glm-5.2
2,766.68 ms
kimi-k2.7-code
6,571.81 ms
P95 API latency
glm-5.2
10,000 ms
kimi-k2.7-code
30,000 ms
Side-by-side trends
Shared charts make the observed differences easier to read. Metrics without enough history stay hidden.
Request success rate
Both models on the same scale
glm-5.2: 100%kimi-k2.7-code: 100%
Average API latency
Both models on the same scale
glm-5.2: 666 mskimi-k2.7-code: 1,138 ms
P95 API latency
Both models on the same scale
glm-5.2: 5,000 mskimi-k2.7-code: 2,000 ms
Estimate your workload
Published rates are loaded from the pricing API; per-request quotes are billed from actual provider usage.
Checking current pricing…
Checking current pricing…
Quick take
- glm-5.2 has a larger context window.
- The recent stability rates are too close to distinguish meaningfully.
- glm-5.2 recorded a lower observed p95 API latency on LLM7 during this period.