DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Kimi K2.7 Code

At a Glance

Compare
Kimi K2.7 CodeMoonshot AI
Intelligence, Cost, and Efficiency
CostLower is better · Published-token output estimate#5 of 44$0.022 per LiveBench case#9 of 44$0.042 per LiveBench case
Pricing and Limits
Input priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens$0.15DeepSeek · Sep 10, 2026$0.68Deepinfra · Sep 22, 2026
Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens$0.60Deepinfra · Sep 22, 2026$3.21Openrouter · Sep 22, 2026
Context windowMaximum documented tokens1,049K262K
Model facts checkedSep 10, 2026View model evidence →Sep 3, 2026View model evidence →

Token prices are the lowest available sourced USD rates; input and output may use different providers. Cost ranking estimates output spend on LiveBench, not a full request bill. Ranking methodology →

Available Benchmarks

All benchmark results →
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V4.1-FlashKimi K2.7 Code
LiveBench2026-06-25 · overall · leader83.20100% of row best · percent · deepseek-v4.1-flash-max · 36,355 output tokens / case71.4586% of row best · percent · kimi-k2.7-code · 13,007 output tokens / case
Overall ResultCounted from the protocol-matched rows above1 benchmark winNo overall winner0 benchmark winsNo overall winner

Third-party benchmark Only like-for-like primary-publisher results are shown; raw scores, relative scores, configuration, and token spend remain visible.

Side-by-Side Facts

FieldDeepSeek-V4.1-FlashKimi K2.7 Code
DeveloperDeepSeekMoonshot AI
FamilyDeepseek V4 1Kimi K2 7
ModelDeepSeek-V4.1-FlashKimi K2.7 Code
VersionDeepSeek-V4.1-FlashKimi K2.7 Code
Lifecycleactiveactive
Released2026-09-102026-06-11
Knowledge cutoffUnknownUnknown
Input modalitiesText, ImageText, Image, Video
Output modalitiesTextText
Context window1,049K262K
Total parameters763.2B1T
Active parametersUnknown32B
Licensemitmodified-mit
Open weightsYesYes
API availableYesYes
Self-hostableYesYes
Provider accessDeepSeek (Standard), Deepinfra (Standard), Together Ai (Standard)Deepinfra (Standard), Fireworks Ai (Standard), Openrouter (Standard), Together Ai (Standard)
Capabilitiesagents, chat, fim, generation, reasoning, responses, structured_outputs, tools, visionagents, chat, coding, reasoning, tools, vision
Architecture designCausal Encoder-Decoder (20 encoder + 20 decoder layers)Unknown
Backbone parameters552000000000 parametersUnknown
Active parameters during decode16000000000 parametersUnknown
Active parameters during prefill8000000000 parametersUnknown
Pre-training corpus45000000000000 tokensUnknown
Reasoning effort range1–100Unknown
Routed experts per MoE layer384 expertsUnknown
Routed experts per token6 expertsUnknown
Transformer layers40 layersUnknown

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash Capabilities

agentschatfimgenerationreasoningresponsesstructured outputstoolsvision
Serving providers3
Canonical IDdeepseek-ai/DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash

Kimi K2.7 Code Capabilities

agentschatcodingreasoningtoolsvision
Serving providers4
Canonical IDmoonshotai/Kimi-K2.7-Code

Primary Evidence

Sources and Freshness

Questions

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Kimi K2.7 Code FAQs

Is DeepSeek V4.1 Flash or Kimi K2.7 Code better for coding?+

This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both DeepSeek V4.1 Flash and Kimi K2.7 Code, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.

Which is cheaper, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash or Kimi K2.7 Code?+

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is $0.15 and Kimi K2.7 Code is $0.68 per million tokens, so DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is cheaper on this metric. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is $0.60 and Kimi K2.7 Code is $3.21 per million tokens, so DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is cheaper on this metric.

Which has a larger context window, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash or Kimi K2.7 Code?+

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash has the larger sourced context window. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash supports 1,049K and Kimi K2.7 Code supports 262K.

Which performs better in benchmarks, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash or Kimi K2.7 Code?+

There is no overall benchmark winner: At least two independently verified, protocol-matched benchmarks are required for an overall winner.

Can DeepSeek V4.1 Flash or Kimi K2.7 Code be self-hosted?+

Both models have the same recorded self-hosting status: supported. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is open weight; Kimi K2.7 Code is open weight.

Can DeepSeek V4.1 Flash and Kimi K2.7 Code understand images?+

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is documented with image input; Kimi K2.7 Code is documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.

Which can generate longer answers, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash or Kimi K2.7 Code?+

Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is 393K and Kimi K2.7 Code is —.

Do DeepSeek V4.1 Flash and Kimi K2.7 Code support reasoning and tool use?+

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Kimi K2.7 Code: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Feature support does not establish relative quality.

Which is available from more inference providers, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash or Kimi K2.7 Code?+

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash has 3 sourced provider routes; Kimi K2.7 Code has 4, so Kimi K2.7 Code has broader tracked availability.

Which offers better value, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash or Kimi K2.7 Code?+

There is no universal value winner. Compare the input and output prices above with the matched benchmark result for your workload: cheaper tokens can be offset by different quality, token usage, latency, or provider availability.

Send Feedback