Compare AI models
| Specifications | ||
ParametersThe learned values that shape how a model responds. B means billion and T means trillion. For mixture-of-experts models, the total count is larger than the number active for each token. Parameter count alone does not measure quality. | 128B | 1T |
Context windowHow much information the model can work with in one request, measured in tokens — pieces of words or other data. This includes your question, attachments, conversation and reply. Limits can vary by model variant and provider. | 256k | 128k |
| API pricingUSD per 1M tokens · lower wins | ||
Input priceWhat you pay for everything you send the model — your question, plus any documents or earlier conversation you include with it. | $1.50 | — |
Output priceWhat you pay for the text the model writes back. It is normally the dearer half: producing an answer costs more than reading one. | $7.50 | — |
Cached input priceA reduced rate for text you send over and over. If every request starts with the same instructions or the same document, the provider keeps a copy ready and charges less to read it again. | $0.15 | — |
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. | $1.50Mistral | $0.57Novita |
Cheapest outputLowest output rate across every provider on OpenRouter, the lab included. May come from a different provider than the cheapest input. | $7.50Mistral | $2.30Novita |
| $675Mistral list price | $229Novita · 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. | 77.6% | 65.8% |
BullshitBench v2Nonsense detection — Given a confidently-worded but nonsensical prompt, does the AI spot that it makes no sense and push back — instead of playing along and inventing an answer? The score is how often it clearly called out the nonsense. Higher is better. | — | 10% |
Humanity's Last Exam · with toolsMultidisciplinary reasoning — Humanity's Last Exam — extremely hard expert questions across many subjects. “With tools” means the AI is allowed to search the web or run code while answering. Higher is better. | — | 4.7% |
GPQA DiamondScience — Graduate-level science questions in biology, physics, and chemistry — hard enough that subject-matter PhDs score around 65%. Higher is better. | — | 75.1% |
| Overview | ||
| Company | Mistral | Moonshot AI |
| Release date | Apr 29 2026 | Jul 11 2025 |
| Access | Open Weight | Open Weight |
| Model details | View model | View model |
Other comparisons
Mistral Medium 3.5vsClaude Haiku 5.5Kimi K2vsClaude Haiku 5.5Mistral Medium 3.5vsGPT-6.1 TerraKimi K2vsGPT-6.1 TerraMistral Medium 3.5vsGemini 4 CarbonKimi K2vsGemini 4 CarbonMistral Medium 3.5vsMuse Spark OpenKimi K2vsMuse Spark OpenMistral Medium 3.5vsGrok 4.7Kimi K2vsGrok 4.7Mistral Medium 3.5vsDeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017Kimi K2vsDeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017Frequently asked questions
Mistral Medium 3.5 leads Kimi K2 on 1 of the 1 benchmark they both report (SWE-Bench Verified). Only Mistral Medium 3.5 has a verified first-party price for an available API: $1.50 per million input tokens and $7.50 per million output tokens. No currently available pay-as-you-go API rate is tracked for Kimi K2. Kimi K2 shipped 292 days before Mistral Medium 3.5, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
Mistral Medium 3.5 has 128B parameters, while Kimi K2 has 1T. Context windows are 256k (Mistral Medium 3.5) vs 128k (Kimi K2).
On SWE-Bench Verified, Mistral Medium 3.5 leads at 77.6% vs Kimi K2 at 65.8%.