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. | 128k | — |
| API pricingUSD per 1M tokens · lower wins · base tier | ||
Input priceWhat you pay for everything you send the model — your question, plus any documents or earlier conversation you include with it. | — | $1.00 |
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. | — | $2.00 |
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. | — | $0.20 |
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. | $0.57Novita | — |
Cheapest outputLowest output rate across every provider on OpenRouter, the lab included. May come from a different provider than the cheapest input. | $2.30Novita | — |
| $229Novita · fp8 | $300SpaceXSI list price | |
| 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. | 65.8% | 70.8% |
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 | Moonshot AI | SpaceXSI |
| Release date | Jul 11 2025 | Aug 28 2025 |
| Access | Open Weight | Closed |
| Model details | View model | View model |
Other comparisons
Kimi K2vsClaude Haiku 5.5Grok Code Fast 1vsClaude Haiku 5.5Kimi K2vsGPT-6.1 SolGrok Code Fast 1vsGPT-6.1 SolKimi K2vsGemini 4 ArgonGrok Code Fast 1vsGemini 4 ArgonKimi K2vsMuse WonderGrok Code Fast 1vsMuse WonderKimi K2vsDeepSeek-V4.1-FlashGrok Code Fast 1vsDeepSeek-V4.1-FlashKimi K2vsMistral Large 4Grok Code Fast 1vsMistral Large 4Frequently asked questions
Grok Code Fast 1 leads Kimi K2 on 1 of the 1 benchmark they both report (SWE-Bench Verified). Only Grok Code Fast 1 has a verified first-party API price: $1.00 per million input tokens and $2.00 per million output tokens. No pay-as-you-go API rate is tracked for Kimi K2. Kimi K2 shipped 48 days before Grok Code Fast 1, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
Kimi K2 is open weight, while Grok Code Fast 1 is closed.
On SWE-Bench Verified, Grok Code Fast 1 leads at 70.8% vs Kimi K2 at 65.8%.