Kimi K2.7 Code vs GLM 5.3 Flash

At a Glance

Compare
Kimi K2.7 CodeMoonshot AI
Intelligence, Cost, and Efficiency
IntelligenceHigher is better · MM Intelligence v2.5UnrankedNot in the 46-model eligible cohort#29 of 4654.6 score · 2/3 sources · provisional · missing ARC-AGI-2 · full-core range 36.4–69.8
CostLower is better · Published-token output estimate#9 of 44$0.042 per LiveBench case#2 of 44$0.0087 per LiveBench case
EfficiencyHigher is better · MM Efficiency v1.5UnrankedNot in the 38-model eligible cohort#1 of 3877.3 score · 2/3 sources · provisional · missing ARC-AGI-2 · full-core range 68.2–84.9
Pricing and Limits
Input priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens$0.68Deepinfra · Sep 22, 2026$0.075Z.ai · Aug 29, 2026
Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens$3.21Openrouter · Sep 22, 2026$0.25Z.ai · Aug 29, 2026
Context windowMaximum documented tokens262K1,000K
Model facts checkedSep 3, 2026View model evidence →Sep 2, 2026View model evidence →

Token prices are the lowest available sourced USD rates; input and output may use different providers. Cost ranking estimates output spend on LiveBench, not a full request bill. Ranking methodology →

Available Benchmarks

All benchmark results →
BenchmarkKimi K2.7 CodeGLM-5.3-Flash
LiveBench2026-06-25 · overall · leader71.4598% of row best · percent · kimi-k2.7-code · 13,007 output tokens / case73.27100% of row best · percent · glm-5.3-flash · 34,707 output tokens / case
Overall ResultCounted from the protocol-matched rows above0 benchmark winsNo overall winner1 benchmark winNo overall winner

Third-party benchmark Only like-for-like primary-publisher results are shown; raw scores, relative scores, configuration, and token spend remain visible.

Side-by-Side Facts

FieldKimi K2.7 CodeGLM-5.3-Flash
DeveloperMoonshot AIZ.ai
FamilyKimi K2 7Glm 5 3 Flash
ModelKimi K2.7 CodeGLM-5.3-Flash
VersionKimi K2.7 CodeGLM-5.3-Flash
Lifecycleactiveactive
Released2026-06-112026-09-02
Knowledge cutoffUnknownUnknown
Input modalitiesText, Image, VideoText, Image, Video, Document
Output modalitiesTextText
Context window262K1,000K
Total parameters1T320B
Active parameters32B18B
Licensemodified-mitMIT
Open weightsYesYes
API availableYesYes
Self-hostableYesYes
Provider accessDeepinfra (Standard), Fireworks Ai (Standard), Openrouter (Standard), Together Ai (Standard)Deepinfra (Standard), Fireworks Ai (Standard), Together Ai (Standard), Z.ai (Standard)
Capabilitiesagents, chat, coding, reasoning, tools, visionagents, chat, computer-use, reasoning, structured_outputs, tools, vision

Kimi K2.7 Code Capabilities

agentschatcodingreasoningtoolsvision
Serving providers4
Canonical IDmoonshotai/Kimi-K2.7-Code

GLM 5.3 Flash Capabilities

agentschatcomputer-usereasoningstructured outputstoolsvision
Serving providers4
Canonical IDzai-org/glm-5.3-flash

Primary Evidence

Sources and Freshness

Questions

Kimi K2.7 Code vs GLM 5.3 Flash FAQs

Is Kimi K2.7 Code or GLM 5.3 Flash better for coding?+

This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Kimi K2.7 Code and GLM 5.3 Flash, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.

Which is cheaper, Kimi K2.7 Code or GLM 5.3 Flash?+

Kimi K2.7 Code is $0.68 and GLM 5.3 Flash is $0.075 per million tokens, so GLM 5.3 Flash is cheaper on this metric. Kimi K2.7 Code is $3.21 and GLM 5.3 Flash is $0.25 per million tokens, so GLM 5.3 Flash is cheaper on this metric.

Which has a larger context window, Kimi K2.7 Code or GLM 5.3 Flash?+

GLM 5.3 Flash has the larger sourced context window. Kimi K2.7 Code supports 262K and GLM 5.3 Flash supports 1,000K.

Which performs better in benchmarks, Kimi K2.7 Code or GLM 5.3 Flash?+

There is no overall benchmark winner: At least two independently verified, protocol-matched benchmarks are required for an overall winner.

Can Kimi K2.7 Code or GLM 5.3 Flash be self-hosted?+

Both models have the same recorded self-hosting status: supported. Kimi K2.7 Code is open weight; GLM 5.3 Flash is open weight.

Can Kimi K2.7 Code and GLM 5.3 Flash understand images?+

Kimi K2.7 Code is documented with image input; GLM 5.3 Flash is documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.

Which can generate longer answers, Kimi K2.7 Code or GLM 5.3 Flash?+

Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. Kimi K2.7 Code is — and GLM 5.3 Flash is 131K.

Do Kimi K2.7 Code and GLM 5.3 Flash support reasoning and tool use?+

Kimi K2.7 Code: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. GLM 5.3 Flash: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Feature support does not establish relative quality.

Which is available from more inference providers, Kimi K2.7 Code or GLM 5.3 Flash?+

Kimi K2.7 Code has 4 sourced provider routes; GLM 5.3 Flash has 4, a tie.

Which offers better value, Kimi K2.7 Code or GLM 5.3 Flash?+

There is no universal value winner. Compare the input and output prices above with the matched benchmark result for your workload: cheaper tokens can be offset by different quality, token usage, latency, or provider availability.

Send Feedback