GLM-5.1 vs Kimi K2.5 vs Qwen3.6 Max Preview
Kimi K2.5 comes out ahead, 65 to 57 and 54 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.
Z.ai (Zhipu)GLM-5.1
57/100- ECI149.9
- Price$1.40 / $4.40
- Context200K
- Our pick
Moonshot AIKimi K2.5
65/100- ECI148.0
- Price$0.60 / $3.00
- Context262K
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen3.6 Max Preview
54/100- ECI149.2
- Price$1.30 / $7.80
- Context262K
Kimi K2.5 is our pick
Kimi K2.5 is the better all-round choice, scoring 65/100 against GLM-5.1 (57) and Qwen3.6 Max Preview (54). It leads on price and inputs & features. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
- CapabilityGLM-5.1Capabilities Index (ECI): GLM-5.1 149.9 · Qwen3.6 Max Preview 149.2 · Kimi K2.5 148.0
- Lowest priceKimi K2.5Kimi K2.5 $1.20 · GLM-5.1 $2.15 · Qwen3.6 Max Preview $2.92 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextKimi K2.5 and Qwen3.6 Max PreviewKimi K2.5 262,144 · Qwen3.6 Max Preview 262,144 · GLM-5.1 200,000 tokens
- Widest inputsKimi K2.5GLM-5.1: Text · Kimi K2.5: Text, Images, Video · Qwen3.6 Max Preview: Text
- Self-hostingGLM-5.1 and Kimi K2.5Publishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | GLM-5.1 | Kimi K2.5 | Qwen3.6 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI) | 50% | 78 | 76 | 77 |
| Price | 25% | 34 | 46 | 28 |
| Inputs & features | 15% | 45 | 80 | 35 |
| Context window | 10% | 32 | 37 | 37 |
| Overall | 100% | 57/100 | 65/100 | 54/100 |
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | GLM-5.1Z.ai (Zhipu) | Kimi K2.5Moonshot AI | Qwen3.6 Max PreviewAlibaba (Qwen) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | 149.9 (best) | 148.0 | 149.2 |
| ECI rank | #51 of 148 (best) | #58 of 148 | #54 of 148 |
| GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions | 89.9% (best) | 87.6% | 87.4% |
| FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics | 36.8% | — | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics | 93.3% (best) | 92.2% | 91.1% |
| SWE-bench VerifiedFixing real GitHub issues | 74.2% | 73.8% | 76.7% (best) |
| SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions | 34.0% | 34.3% | 52.0% (best) |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $1.40 | $0.60 (best) | $1.30 |
| Output | $4.40 | $3.00 (best) | $7.80 |
| Cached input | $0.26 | — | $0.13 (best) |
| Blended (3:1) | $2.15 | $1.20 (best) | $2.92 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Z.AI API | Median of 21 providers | Official Alibaba API |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 200,000 tokens | 262,144 tokens (best) | 262,144 tokens (best) |
| Max output | 131,072 tokens | 262,144 tokens (best) | 65,536 tokens |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | Yes | No |
| PDFs | No | No | No |
| Audio | No | No | No |
| Video | No | Yes | No |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | Yes | Yes | No |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Open | Open | Proprietary |
| API model ID | glm-5.1 | — | qwen3.6-max-preview |
| API providers | 40 (best) | 21 | 10 |
| Released | Apr 7, 2026 | Jan 27, 2026 | Apr 20, 2026 |
| Knowledge cutoff | — | Jan 2025 | Apr 2025 |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- GLM-5.1$22.80
- Kimi K2.5$12.00
- Qwen3.6 Max Preview$28.60
Which should you choose?
Which is better: GLM-5.1, Kimi K2.5 or Qwen3.6 Max Preview?
Kimi K2.5 is the better all-round choice, scoring 65/100 against GLM-5.1 (57) and Qwen3.6 Max Preview (54). It leads on price and inputs & features. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
Which is cheaper, GLM-5.1, Kimi K2.5 or Qwen3.6 Max Preview?
Kimi K2.5 is cheaper at $0.60 input / $3.00 output per million tokens (median across 21 API providers). GLM-5.1 costs $1.40 input / $4.40 output per million tokens (official Z.AI API price); Qwen3.6 Max Preview costs $1.30 input / $7.80 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $1.20 per million tokens for Kimi K2.5 versus $2.15 for GLM-5.1 (1.8× as much) and $2.92 for Qwen3.6 Max Preview (2.4× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
GLM-5.1 scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): GLM-5.1 149.9 (#51 of 148), Qwen3.6 Max Preview 149.2 (#54 of 148) and Kimi K2.5 148.0 (#58 of 148). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (148.0–151.6 vs 147.6–152.0), so treat the gap as small. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — GLM-5.1 89.9%, Kimi K2.5 87.6%, Qwen3.6 Max Preview 87.4%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — GLM-5.1 93.3%, Kimi K2.5 92.2%, Qwen3.6 Max Preview 91.1%; SWE-bench Verified — Qwen3.6 Max Preview 76.7%, GLM-5.1 74.2%, Kimi K2.5 73.8%; SimpleQA Verified — Qwen3.6 Max Preview 52.0%, Kimi K2.5 34.3%, GLM-5.1 34.0%.
Which is better for coding?
Qwen3.6 Max Preview resolves more real GitHub issues on SWE-bench Verified: Qwen3.6 Max Preview 76.7%, GLM-5.1 74.2% and Kimi K2.5 73.8%. All three support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
Kimi K2.5 and Qwen3.6 Max Preview have the largest context windows (262,144 and 262,144 tokens), against 200,000 for GLM-5.1. Maximum output per response: GLM-5.1 up to 131,072, Kimi K2.5 up to 262,144, Qwen3.6 Max Preview up to 65,536 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
GLM-5.1 accepts text; Kimi K2.5 accepts text, images and video; Qwen3.6 Max Preview accepts text. Kimi K2.5 handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
GLM-5.1 and Kimi K2.5 publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Qwen3.6 Max Preview is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Qwen3.6 Max Preview is the newest, released Apr 20, 2026. GLM-5.1 came out Apr 7, 2026; Kimi K2.5 came out Jan 27, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: Kimi K2.5 Jan 2025, Qwen3.6 Max Preview Apr 2025.
How do you decide the winner?
Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Oct 4, 2026.
