GLM-4.5-Air vs Kimi K2
Benchmarks, API Token Pricing, Context Window & Speed Comparison
Related topics (12)
GLM-4.5-Air by Zhipu AI and Kimi K2 by Moonshot AI represent two of the frontier AI models analyzed in our comprehensive 2026 AI benchmark and LLM comparison. In this head-to-head evaluation, we examine API token pricing, context window specifications, inference speed (tokens per second), and empirical reasoning performance. From a pure economic perspective, both models offer identical input token rates. On output generation, costs are matched. In data-heavy architectures requiring extensive repository or document analysis, both models provide an identical memory horizon with 131K tokens. In latency-sensitive production environments, GLM-4.5-Air leads in tokens-per-second throughput, making it ideal for real-time conversational agents and high-concurrency workflows. Below is the complete empirical head-to-head breakdown across cost, speed, context, and capability matrices.
Changez et Comparez les Modèles
Select any AI models from our verified benchmark database to generate live side-by-side matrices.
GLM-4.5-Air
GLM plus légerléger ouvert MoE modèle conçu pour efficient sur-device ou workstation hébergement avec faible matériel overhead.
$0.00 / 1M
$0.00 / 1M
131.1K tokens
N/A
Kimi K2
Géant agentique open sourceMoonshot d'AI landmark 1-billions paramètre ouvert MoE modèle de fondation développé pour autonome agents, profond codage, et outil exécution.
$0.00 / 1M
$0.00 / 1M
131.1K tokens
46%
Différences Clés en un Coup d’Œil
- Both models cost the same under this workload — choose on capability, not price.
- GLM-4.5-Air is faster at 120 tok/s vs 62 tok/s.
| Caractéristique | GLM-4.5-Air | Kimi K2 |
|---|---|---|
Intelligence Index Composite reasoning & knowledge score (0-100) | 74 | 83 |
Provider | Zhipu AI | Moonshot AI |
Input Price Cost per million input tokens | $0.00 / 1M | $0.00 / 1M |
Output Price Cost per million output tokens | $0.00 / 1M | $0.00 / 1M |
Blended Price Weighted 7:2:1 cache:input:output per 1M | $0.00 / 1M | $0.00 / 1M |
Context Window Maximum input + output tokens | 131.1K tokens~197 A4 pages of text | 131.1K tokens~197 A4 pages of text |
Max Output Tokens Per single request | 8K | 16K |
Throughput Speed Tokens generated per second | 120 tok/s | 62 tok/s |
SWE-bench Verified Real-world software engineering | N/A | 46% |
GPQA Diamond Graduate-level reasoning | 52% | 66.5% |
Qui gagne où ?
At-a-glance decision frameworkEvaluations ongoing
Scores de Benchmarks Vérifiés
Official evaluation metrics verified by independent third-party research labs.
Industry benchmark evaluating real-world GitHub issue resolution and multi-file debugging.
Challenging questions created by domain experts to test complex PhD-level reasoning.
Hardened reasoning and academic knowledge benchmark with reduced lucky-guess probability.
Crowdsourced human preference evaluation based on blind, head-to-head model battles.
Tokens emitted per second during active generation streaming.
Latence et Temps de Réponse
Time to first token (TTFT) and estimated end-to-end response time for a typical 500-token response.
Simulateur Interactif de Coût de Tokens
Adjust sliders to calculate projected monthly cloud API spending with prompt caching discounts.
GLM-4.5-Air · Strengths & Key Advantages
- faible matériel empreinte fonctionne comfortably sur dual RTX 3090/4090 workstations
- rapide inférence débit exceeding 120 tokens/sec
- bon instruction alignment pour day-à-day d'entreprise tâches
Considerations & Trade-offs
- inférieur précision sur complexe algorithmic mathématiques et formel proofs
- manque de natif visuel compréhension
Kimi K2 · Strengths & Key Advantages
- massif 1T paramètre knowledge base avec efficient 32B actif paramètre inférence
- natif multi-étapes agent planning et complexe environment interaction
- à poids ouverts permitting complet auto-hébergé d'entreprise déploiement
Considerations & Trade-offs
- nécessite substantiel distributed VRAM infrastructure pour complet-précision hosting
- texte-seulement interface sans natif visuel compréhension
Token Use & Task Economics
Estimated cost and token consumption to complete one representative agentic task.
| Metric | GLM-4.5-Air | Kimi K2 |
|---|---|---|
Cost per Task Estimated USD to finish one task | $0.00 | $0.00 |
Output Tokens / Task Tokens generated per task | 12K | 22K |
Reasoning Tokens / Task Thinking tokens burned per task | 2K | 8K |
Spécifications Techniques
Architecture, release timeline, capabilities, and modalities.
| Caractéristique | GLM-4.5-Air | Kimi K2 |
|---|---|---|
| Official API Model ID (SDK) | glm-4-5-air | kimi-k2 |
| API Protocol | OpenAI-Compatible REST / vLLM / SGLang / HuggingFace TGI | OpenAI-Compatible REST / vLLM / SGLang / HuggingFace TGI |
| Release Date | 2025-07 | 2025-07 |
| Knowledge Cutoff | May 2025 | May 2025 |
| Architecture | Lightweight Sparse Mixture-of-Experts Transformer | Trillion-Scale Sparse Mixture-of-Experts Transformer |
| Parameters | 30B MoE | 1T total (32B active MoE) |
| Enterprise Rate Limits (RPM / TPM) | Unlimited (Hardware-bound on self-hosted GPU) / 10,000 RPM Cloud · Unlimited local throughput / 10M+ TPM Managed Cloud | Unlimited (Hardware-bound on self-hosted GPU) / 10,000 RPM Cloud · Unlimited local throughput / 10M+ TPM Managed Cloud |
| Long-Context Tier (>128K/200K) | Free across full context window (only KV-cache VRAM scales) | Free across full context window (only KV-cache VRAM scales) |
| Prompt Cache Policy & TTL | Automatic prefix KV-caching in vLLM / SGLang (0 cost) | Automatic prefix KV-caching in vLLM / SGLang (0 cost) |
| Computer Use / GUI Agent | API / CLI Tool-Use & DOM Agent ready (no raw pixel desktop click loop) | API / CLI Tool-Use & DOM Agent ready (no raw pixel desktop click loop) |
| MCP & Parallel Tool Calling | Native MCP Client/Server ready · Parallel function calling · 100% Strict JSON Schema | Native MCP Client/Server ready · Parallel function calling · 100% Strict JSON Schema |
| Web Search Grounding & Sandbox | Supported via external Tavily/Exa Search & E2B/Docker Sandbox tools | Supported via external Tavily/Exa Search & E2B/Docker Sandbox tools |
| Official Fine-Tuning Support | Full Weights SFT, LoRA, QLoRA, DPO & GRPO RL (Unsloth / Axolotl / Llama-Factory) | Full Weights SFT, LoRA, QLoRA, DPO & GRPO RL (Unsloth / Axolotl / Llama-Factory) |
| Multimodal Token Billing | Text BPE (~4 chars/token) | Text BPE (~4 chars/token) |
| Quantization & Min GPU VRAM | BF16 / FP16, FP8 Dynamic, INT4 AWQ / GPTQ, GGUF (Q4_K_M / Q8_0) · 19 GB VRAM (4-bit Quantized) · 65 GB VRAM (Native BF16) | BF16 / FP16, FP8 Dynamic, INT4 AWQ / GPTQ, GGUF (Q4_K_M / Q8_0) · 620 GB VRAM (4-bit Quantized) · 2150 GB VRAM (Native BF16) |
| Safety & Frontier Classification | Open-Weights System Card + Customizable Guardrail Layer (Llama Guard / ShieldGemma) | Open-Weights System Card + Customizable Guardrail Layer (Llama Guard / ShieldGemma) |
| Enterprise Compliance (ZDR/HIPAA/SOC2) | 100% Air-Gapped On-Premises / Private VPC · Full HIPAA, GDPR & SOC2 Control | 100% Air-Gapped On-Premises / Private VPC · Full HIPAA, GDPR & SOC2 Control |
| Input Modalities | text | text |
| Output Modalities | text | text |
GLM-4.5-Air vs Kimi K2: Réponses Rapides (FAQ)
Which is more intelligent, GLM-4.5-Air or Kimi K2?
Kimi K2 is more intelligent. It scores 83 compared with 74 on the composite Intelligence Index.
Which model is faster?
GLM-4.5-Air is faster, generating 120 tokens per second compared with 62 tokens per second.
Which model has lower latency?
GLM-4.5-Air has lower latency, with a time to first token of 0.36s compared with 0.64s.
Verdict
Verdict & Model Selection Recommendation: Choose GLM-4.5-Air if your priority is Developer desktop assistance, customer support bots, and internal document search. Its performance in demanding tasks justifies its operational token cost. Choose Kimi K2 if your workflow prioritizes Enterprise autonomous agents, private software engineering pipelines, and complex tool calling. For large-scale batch processing or customer-facing conversational interfaces, its balance of speed and economics delivers superior ROI.
Questions fréquentes
How does GLM-4.5-Air compare to Kimi K2 in API token pricing and cost per token?+
Both GLM-4.5-Air and Kimi K2 are open-weights foundation models available at $0.00 direct API cost when self-hosted, or offered at identical baseline rates across major inference providers. Model selection depends on GPU deployment sizing and specialized benchmark performance rather than raw token price.
Which model has a larger context window: GLM-4.5-Air or Kimi K2?+
Both GLM-4.5-Air and Kimi K2 offer an identical context window of 131K tokens (~98k words). Both architectures provide equal capacity for large document ingestion, multi-file codebases, and extended multi-turn conversation histories.
Which AI model is better for software engineering and coding: GLM-4.5-Air or Kimi K2?+
GLM-4.5-Air scores at the frontier of coding benchmarks, while Kimi K2 scores 46%. For complex autonomous debugging and agentic engineering, Kimi K2 provides robust code generation and tool calling.
What is the difference in reasoning capability and extended thinking between GLM-4.5-Air and Kimi K2?+
GLM-4.5-Air features native chain-of-thought extended thinking mode with configurable reasoning effort. In contrast, Kimi K2 provides chain-of-thought reasoning depth for complex math and science.
How does inference speed (tokens per second) compare between GLM-4.5-Air and Kimi K2?+
GLM-4.5-Air generates approximately 120 tokens per second, while Kimi K2 delivers 62 tokens per second. In latency-sensitive production environments, GLM-4.5-Air provides faster time-to-first-token (TTFT) and higher streaming response velocity.
Can you implement a tiered LLM routing setup combining GLM-4.5-Air and Kimi K2 to optimize costs?+
Yes! Tiered multi-model routing can optimize for latency and accuracy: you can route high-frequency conversational turns and latency-sensitive queries to GLM-4.5-Air, and route deep architectural or complex reasoning queries to GLM-4.5-Air. This balanced routing strategy maximizes system throughput and answer quality.
Understand key metrics like context window, token pricing, reasoning mode, and SWE-bench scores in our comprehensive AI glossary.
Related reading
- GLM-4.5 vs GLM-4.5-Air: Benchmarks, Pricing & Speed ComparisonComparer
- Kimi K2 Thinking vs Kimi K2: Benchmarks, Pricing & Speed ComparisonComparer
- Aion-3.0 vs Aion-Mini: Benchmarks, Pricing & Speed ComparisonComparer
- Aion-3.0 vs Gemini 3.6 Flash: Benchmarks, Pricing & Speed ComparisonComparer
- Aion-Mini vs Laguna XS 2.1: Benchmarks, Pricing & Speed ComparisonComparer
- Aya Expanse 32B vs Llama 3.2 90B Vision: Benchmarks, Pricing & Speed ComparisonComparer
Les scores de benchmarks, tarifs par token et limites évoluent rapidement. Vérifiez toujours les spécifications actuelles sur la documentation officielle du fournisseur.
Sources: GetInfoUs Independent AI Benchmarks & Official API Specs