Gemini 3.5 Flash vs Kimi K2.5
At a Glance
| Compare |  Gemini 3.5 FlashGoogle DeepMind |  Kimi K2.5Moonshot AI |
|---|---|---|
| Intelligence, Cost, and Efficiency | ||
| IntelligenceHigher is better · MM Intelligence v2.5 | #15 of 4672.1 score · 3/3 sources · complete | UnrankedNot in the 46-model eligible cohort |
| CostLower is better · Published-token output estimate | #25 of 44$0.140 per LiveBench case | UnrankedNot in the 44-model eligible cohort |
| EfficiencyHigher is better · MM Efficiency v1.5 | #15 of 3856.8 score · 3/3 sources · complete | UnrankedNot in the 38-model eligible cohort |
| Pricing and Limits | ||
| Input priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | $1.50Google AI ↗ · Aug 29, 2026 | $0.45Deepinfra ↗ · Aug 29, 2026 |
| Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | $9.00Google AI ↗ · Aug 29, 2026 | $2.25Deepinfra ↗ · Aug 29, 2026 |
| Context windowMaximum documented tokens | 1,049K | 262K |
| Model facts checked | Aug 29, 2026View model evidence → | Aug 28, 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
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash | Kimi-K2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Document Arenadocument-2026-09-13-d25aabda0010 · arena_rating · leader | 1,461.40100% of row best · rating · gemini-3.5-flash-high; 95% CI [1452.14297727, 1470.66464631]; votes 4061; rank 22 | 1,430.1098% of row best · rating · kimi-k2.5-thinking; 95% CI [1423.37027866, 1436.81983378]; votes 21569; rank 34 |
| LMArena Text Arenatext-2026-09-13-d25aabda0010 · arena_rating · leader | 1,475.72100% of row best · rating · gemini-3.5-flash-medium; 95% CI [1471.24691172, 1480.19960285]; votes 36627; rank 19 | 1,445.6498% of row best · rating · kimi-k2.5-thinking; 95% CI [1442.30343195, 1448.97544647]; votes 70513; rank 53 |
| LMArena Vision Arenavision-2026-09-13-d25aabda0010 · arena_rating · leader | 1,307.00100% of row best · rating · gemini-3.5-flash-medium; 95% CI [1299.26365925, 1314.72946839]; votes 9618; rank 11 | 1,266.9997% of row best · rating · kimi-k2.5-thinking; 95% CI [1261.13170482, 1272.84453452]; votes 26646; rank 39 |
| Overall ResultCounted from the protocol-matched rows above | 3 benchmark winsNo overall winner | 0 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
| Field | Gemini 3.5 Flash | Kimi-K2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| Developer | Google DeepMind | Moonshot AI |
| Family | Gemini 3 | Kimi K2 5 |
| Model | Gemini 3.5 Flash | Kimi-K2.5 |
| Version | Gemini 3.5 Flash | Kimi-K2.5 |
| Lifecycle | active | active |
| Released | Unknown | 2026-01-27 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Unknown | Unknown |
| Input modalities | Text, Image, Video, Audio, Document | Text, Image |
| Output modalities | Text | Text |
| Context window | 1,049K | 262K |
| Total parameters | Unknown | 1T |
| Active parameters | Unknown | 32B |
| License | Unknown | other |
| Open weights | No | Yes |
| API available | Yes | Yes |
| Self-hostable | No | Yes |
| Provider access | Google AI (Standard), Google Gemini (Standard) | Deepinfra (Standard), Hugging Face (Standard), Openrouter (Standard) |
| Capabilities | chat, generation, reasoning, tools | chat, generation, reasoning, tools |
Gemini 3.5 Flash Capabilities
Kimi K2.5 Capabilities
Related Comparisons
All text comparisons →| A | Pair | B | Context |
|---|---|---|---|
Gemini 3.5 FlashGoogle DeepMind | vs |  GPT-6 AstraOpenAI | cross-developer peerstext |
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | vs | Gemini 3.5 FlashGoogle DeepMind | cross-developer peerstext |
Gemini 3.1 ProGoogle DeepMind | vs | Gemini 3.5 FlashGoogle DeepMind | family variantstext |
 DeepSeek-V4.1-FlashDeepSeek | vs | Gemini 3.5 FlashGoogle DeepMind | cross-developer peerstext |
Gemini 3.5 FlashGoogle DeepMind | vs | Grok 4.6xAI | cross-developer peerstext |
Gemini 3.5 FlashGoogle DeepMind | vs |  Qwen3.8-MaxQwen | cross-developer peerstext |
Gemini 3.5 FlashGoogle DeepMind | vs | Kimi-K3Moonshot AI | cross-developer peerstext |
 MiniMax-M3MiniMax | vs | Gemini 3.5 FlashGoogle DeepMind | cross-developer peerstext |
Gemini 3.5 FlashGoogle DeepMind | vs |  GLM-5.3Z.ai | cross-developer peerstext |
Gemini 3.5 FlashGoogle DeepMind | vs |  Hy4 previewTencent | cross-developer peerstext |
Seed 2.1 ProByteDance Seed | vs | Gemini 3.5 FlashGoogle DeepMind | cross-developer peerstext |
Gemini 3.5 FlashGoogle DeepMind | vs |  Mistral Large 3Mistral AI | cross-developer peerstext |
Primary Evidence
Sources and Freshness
Questions
Gemini 3.5 Flash vs Kimi K2.5 FAQs
Is Gemini 3.5 Flash or Kimi K2.5 better for coding?+
This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Gemini 3.5 Flash and Kimi K2.5, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.
Which is cheaper, Gemini 3.5 Flash or Kimi K2.5?+
Gemini 3.5 Flash is $1.50 and Kimi K2.5 is $0.45 per million tokens, so Kimi K2.5 is cheaper on this metric. Gemini 3.5 Flash is $9.00 and Kimi K2.5 is $2.25 per million tokens, so Kimi K2.5 is cheaper on this metric.
Which has a larger context window, Gemini 3.5 Flash or Kimi K2.5?+
Gemini 3.5 Flash has the larger sourced context window. Gemini 3.5 Flash supports 1,049K and Kimi K2.5 supports 262K.
Which performs better in benchmarks, Gemini 3.5 Flash or Kimi K2.5?+
There is no overall benchmark winner: An overall winner requires at least two decisive benchmarks from at least two original publishers.
Can Gemini 3.5 Flash or Kimi K2.5 be self-hosted?+
Kimi K2.5 is the only model in this pair currently marked as self-hostable. Gemini 3.5 Flash is not marked open weight; Kimi K2.5 is open weight.
Can Gemini 3.5 Flash and Kimi K2.5 understand images?+
Gemini 3.5 Flash is documented with image input; Kimi K2.5 is documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.
Which can generate longer answers, Gemini 3.5 Flash or Kimi K2.5?+
Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. Gemini 3.5 Flash is 66K and Kimi K2.5 is —.
Do Gemini 3.5 Flash and Kimi K2.5 support reasoning and tool use?+
Gemini 3.5 Flash: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Kimi K2.5: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Feature support does not establish relative quality.
Which is available from more inference providers, Gemini 3.5 Flash or Kimi K2.5?+
Gemini 3.5 Flash has 2 sourced provider routes; Kimi K2.5 has 3, so Kimi K2.5 has broader tracked availability.
Which offers better value, Gemini 3.5 Flash or Kimi K2.5?+
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.