OpenAI compatible API · Attested · Public status

moonshotai/Kimi-K2-Instruct-0905 vs Z.ai: GLM 5.1

moonshotai/Kimi-K2-Instruct-0905 vs Z.ai: GLM 5.1: compare current API pricing, context, provider routes, privacy, p50 latency, and OpenAI-compatible access.

Verify gateway

Onebase URL to migrate

100sof models and routes

0prompt or output logs. Always.

Compare routesProviders, price, context, and policy posture in one view.

Use auto when uptime mattersKeep a primary model and let fallback handle provider failures.

Same API shapeUse the OpenAI client and set the model you want.

Practical read

Monthly evidence

moonshotai/Kimi-K2-Instruct-0905 has the lower published input-plus-output rate and the larger context window. Z.ai: GLM 5.1 has more Credits provider routes and the lower measured p50 time to first token.

$3.02785/1Mmoonshotai/Kimi-K2-Instruct-0905 cheapest route

$4.2833/1MZ.ai: GLM 5.1 cheapest route

2677 msmoonshotai/Kimi-K2-Instruct-0905 fastest measured p50 TTFT via io-net

1291 msZ.ai: GLM 5.1 fastest measured p50 TTFT via io-net

The price comparison adds each route's rate for one million input tokens and one million output tokens; your cost depends on your input/output mix. Prices and live route measurements can change. Use the monthly reports when you need a stable evidence window, then run a small task-specific eval before choosing a production default.

moonshotai/Kimi-K2-Instruct-0905Z.ai: GLM 5.1

Model idmoonshotai/kimi-k2-instruct-0905z-ai/glm-5.1

Publisher Kimi Z.AI

AI IQ — IQ 113#47

Context262,144 tokens202,752 tokens

Credits provider routes112

Cheapest route$3.02785/1M$4.2833/1M

Cached input$0.300675/1M$0.10339/1M to $0.670411/1M

Privacy postureprovider posture varieshas provider E2EE route

Fastest measured p50 TTFT2677 ms via io-net1291 ms via io-net

Highest measured throughputnot enough datanot enough data

Recent route uptime range100.00%69.23% to 100.00%

Modes chat chat

moonshotai/Kimi-K2-Instruct-0905 routes

Overview1 Credits routes

Z.ai: GLM 5.1 routes

Overview12 Credits routes
PricingInput, cached input, and output rates
BenchmarksTrustedRouter and external sources
ProvidersAll serving providers

Related comparisons

Browse every comparison

Z.ai: GLM 5.1 vs Z.ai: GLM 5.240 combined provider routes
Z.ai: GLM 5.1 vs Z.ai: GLM 5.338 combined provider routes
Z.ai: GLM 5.1 vs Z.ai: GLM 5.3 Flash37 combined provider routes
DeepSeek: DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 vs Z.ai: GLM 5.136 combined provider routes
MoonshotAI: Kimi K3 vs Z.ai: GLM 5.136 combined provider routes
OpenAI: gpt-oss-120b vs Z.ai: GLM 5.134 combined provider routes
MoonshotAI: Kimi K2.6 vs Z.ai: GLM 5.131 combined provider routes
DeepSeek: DeepSeek V4 Pro 0423 vs Z.ai: GLM 5.129 combined provider routes

Production choice

Pick a default model. Keep fallback enabled.

TrustedRouter is useful when you know the model you want, but still need provider rollover, budget limits, usage records, and a prompt path you can verify.

OpenAI clientPython

client = OpenAI(
    base_url="https://api.trustedrouter.com/v1",
    api_key="sk-tr-v1-..."
)

response = client.chat.completions.create(
    model="moonshotai/kimi-k2-instruct-0905",
    messages=messages,
)

Questions

Which should I use, moonshotai/Kimi-K2-Instruct-0905 or Z.ai: GLM 5.1?

Is moonshotai/Kimi-K2-Instruct-0905 or Z.ai: GLM 5.1 cheaper?

The current cheapest TrustedRouter route is $3.02785/1M for moonshotai/Kimi-K2-Instruct-0905 and $4.2833/1M for Z.ai: GLM 5.1. The comparison uses current catalog prices and updates as provider pricing changes.

Is moonshotai/Kimi-K2-Instruct-0905 or Z.ai: GLM 5.1 faster?

Current measured p50 time to first token is 2677 ms for moonshotai/Kimi-K2-Instruct-0905 and 1291 ms for Z.ai: GLM 5.1. These are routed probe measurements, not vendor-advertised speeds, and update as new samples arrive.

Can I test moonshotai/Kimi-K2-Instruct-0905 and Z.ai: GLM 5.1 with the same API?

Yes. Use the same OpenAI-compatible TrustedRouter base URL and API key, then change only the model id between moonshotai/kimi-k2-instruct-0905 and z-ai/glm-5.1. This makes side-by-side evals possible without maintaining two provider integrations.