Compare AI models

Specifications
ParametersA rough measure of how big the model is. More parameters usually means more capable and more expensive to run, though it is a poor guide on its own — a smaller, newer model often beats a larger, older one.
—1T
Context windowHow much text the model can hold in mind at once — your question, any documents you attach, the conversation so far, and its own reply. Go past it and the earliest part falls out of view.
—256k
API pricingUSD per 1M tokens · lower wins
Cheapest inputLowest input rate across every provider on OpenRouter, the lab included. The cheapest endpoint may run a quantised build or a shorter context — see "Available from" on the model page.
—$0.60Novita
Cheapest outputLowest output rate across every provider on OpenRouter, the lab included. May come from a different provider than the cheapest input.
—$2.50Novita
—$245Novita · fp8
Benchmarks
SWE-Bench VerifiedCoding — Real coding tasks pulled from open-source projects — the AI has to find and fix actual bugs. A human-checked version of the original SWE-Bench. Higher is better.
72.5%65.8%
GPQA DiamondScience — Graduate-level science questions in biology, physics, and chemistry — hard enough that subject-matter PhDs score around 65%. Higher is better.
79.6%75.1%
Overview
CompanyAnthropicMoonshot AI
Release dateMay 22 2025Sep 5 2025
AccessClosedOpen Weight
Model detailsView modelView model

Frequently asked questions

Claude Opus 4 leads Kimi K2 (0905) on 2 of the 2 benchmarks they both report (SWE-Bench Verified, GPQA Diamond). Claude Opus 4 shipped 106 days before Kimi K2 (0905), so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.

Claude Opus 4 is closed, while Kimi K2 (0905) is open weight.

On SWE-Bench Verified, Claude Opus 4 leads at 72.5% vs Kimi K2 (0905) at 65.8%. On GPQA Diamond, Claude Opus 4 leads at 79.6% vs Kimi K2 (0905) at 75.1%.