ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Kimi K2.6 vs Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) vs GLM-5.1

Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) comes out ahead, 68 to 65 and 57 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. Moonshot AI

    Kimi K2.6

    Released Apr 21, 2026

    65/100
    • ECI151.1
    • Price$0.95 / $4.00
    • Context262K
  2. Our pick

    xAI

    Grok 4.20 (Reasoning)

    Released Mar 9, 2026

    68/100
    • ECI152.0
    • Price$1.25 / $2.50
    • Context1M
  3. Z.ai (Zhipu)

    GLM-5.1

    Released Apr 7, 2026

    57/100
    • ECI149.9
    • Price$1.40 / $4.40
    • Context200K
01 — Verdict

Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) is our pick

Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) is the better all-round choice, scoring 68/100 against Kimi K2.6 (65) and GLM-5.1 (57). It leads on price and context window. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityGrok 4.20 (Reasoning)Capabilities Index (ECI): Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) 152.0 · Kimi K2.6 151.1 · GLM-5.1 149.9
  • Lowest priceGrok 4.20 (Reasoning)Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) $1.56 · Kimi K2.6 $1.71 · GLM-5.1 $2.15 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextGrok 4.20 (Reasoning)Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) 1,000,000 · Kimi K2.6 262,144 · GLM-5.1 200,000 tokens
  • Widest inputsKimi K2.6 and Grok 4.20 (Reasoning)Kimi K2.6: Text, Images, Video · Grok 4.20 (Reasoning): Text, Images, PDFs · GLM-5.1: Text
  • Self-hostingKimi K2.6 and GLM-5.1Publishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightKimi K2.6Grok 4.20 (Reasoning)GLM-5.1
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%798178
Price25%394134
Inputs & features15%808045
Context window10%376032
Overall100%65/10068/10057/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

Kimi K2.6 vs Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) vs GLM-5.1 specifications side by side
SpecificationKimi K2.6Moonshot AIGrok 4.20 (Reasoning)xAIGLM-5.1Z.ai (Zhipu)
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)151.1152.0 (best)149.9
ECI rank#45 of 148#41 of 148 (best)#51 of 148
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions90.8% (best)89.3%89.9%
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics57.2% (best)44.9%36.8%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics96.1% (best)92.2%93.3%
SWE-bench VerifiedFixing real GitHub issues76.7% (best)—74.2%
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions34.9% (best)30.2%34.0%
Price per million tokens
Input$0.95 (best)$1.25$1.40
Output$4.00$2.50 (best)$4.40
Cached input$0.16 (best)$0.20$0.26
Blended (3:1)$1.71$1.56 (best)$2.15
Long-context rateSame rateOver 200K: $2.50 / $5.00Same rate
Price sourceOfficial Moonshot AI APIOfficial xAI APIOfficial Z.AI API
Limits
Context window262,144 tokens1,000,000 tokens (best)200,000 tokens
Max output262,144 tokens (best)30,000 tokens131,072 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesYesYesNo
PDFsNoYesNo
AudioNoNoNo
VideoYesNoNo
ReasoningYesYesYes
Tool callingYesYesYes
Structured outputYesYesYes
Availability
WeightsOpenProprietaryOpen
API model IDkimi-k2.6grok-4.20-0309-reasoningglm-5.1
API providers46 (best)1140
ReleasedApr 21, 2026Mar 9, 2026Apr 7, 2026
Knowledge cutoffJan 2025——
03 — Cost

What would a month cost?

Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.

  • Kimi K2.6$17.50
  • Grok 4.20 (Reasoning)$17.50
  • GLM-5.1$22.80
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Kimi K2.6, Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) or GLM-5.1?

Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) is the better all-round choice, scoring 68/100 against Kimi K2.6 (65) and GLM-5.1 (57). It leads on price and context window. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, Kimi K2.6, Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) or GLM-5.1?

Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) is cheaper at $1.25 input / $2.50 output per million tokens (official xAI API price). Kimi K2.6 costs $0.95 input / $4.00 output per million tokens (official Moonshot AI API price); GLM-5.1 costs $1.40 input / $4.40 output per million tokens (official Z.AI API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $1.56 per million tokens for Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) versus $1.71 for Kimi K2.6 (1.1× as much) and $2.15 for GLM-5.1 (1.4× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) 152.0 (#41 of 148), Kimi K2.6 151.1 (#45 of 148) and GLM-5.1 149.9 (#51 of 148). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (149.3–154.4 vs 149.1–152.8), so treat the gap as small. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — Kimi K2.6 90.8%, GLM-5.1 89.9%, Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) 89.3%; FrontierMath Tiers 1–3 — Kimi K2.6 57.2%, Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) 44.9%, GLM-5.1 36.8%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — Kimi K2.6 96.1%, GLM-5.1 93.3%, Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) 92.2%; SimpleQA Verified — Kimi K2.6 34.9%, GLM-5.1 34.0%, Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) 30.2%.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. All three support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) has the largest context window at 1,000,000 tokens, against 262,144 for Kimi K2.6 and 200,000 for GLM-5.1. Maximum output per response: Kimi K2.6 up to 262,144, Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) up to 30,000, GLM-5.1 up to 131,072 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Kimi K2.6 accepts text, images and video; Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) accepts text, images and PDFs; GLM-5.1 accepts text. Kimi K2.6 handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Kimi K2.6 and GLM-5.1 publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Kimi K2.6 is the newest, released Apr 21, 2026. GLM-5.1 came out Apr 7, 2026; Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) came out Mar 9, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: Kimi K2.6 Jan 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.