Llama 3.1 405B vs Kimi K2.7 Code
At a Glance
| Compare |  Llama 3.1 405BMeta |  Kimi K2.7 CodeMoonshot AI |
|---|---|---|
| Intelligence, Cost, and Efficiency | ||
| CostLower is better · Published-token output estimate | UnrankedNot in the 44-model eligible cohort | #9 of 44$0.042 per LiveBench case |
| Pricing and Limits | ||
| Input priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | Not reported | $0.68Deepinfra ↗ · Sep 22, 2026 |
| Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | Not reported | $3.21Openrouter ↗ · Sep 22, 2026 |
| Context windowMaximum documented tokens | 131K | 262K |
| Model facts checked | Aug 28, 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
Side-by-Side Facts
| Field | Llama-3.1-405B | Kimi K2.7 Code |
|---|---|---|
| Developer | Meta | Moonshot AI |
| Family | Llama 3 1 405b | Kimi K2 7 |
| Model | Llama-3.1-405B | Kimi K2.7 Code |
| Version | Llama-3.1-405B | Kimi K2.7 Code |
| Lifecycle | active | active |
| Released | 2024-07-23 | 2026-06-11 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Unknown | Unknown |
| Input modalities | Text | Text, Image, Video |
| Output modalities | Text | Text |
| Context window | 131K | 262K |
| Total parameters | 405.9B | 1T |
| Active parameters | Unknown | 32B |
| License | llama3.1 | modified-mit |
| Open weights | Yes | Yes |
| API available | Yes | Yes |
| Self-hostable | Yes | Yes |
| Provider access | Together Ai (Standard) | Deepinfra (Standard), Fireworks Ai (Standard), Openrouter (Standard), Together Ai (Standard) |
| Capabilities | generation | agents, chat, coding, reasoning, tools, vision |
Llama 3.1 405B Capabilities
Kimi K2.7 Code Capabilities
Related Comparisons
All text comparisons →| A | Pair | B | Context |
|---|---|---|---|
Llama-3.1-405BMeta | vs |  GPT-6 AstraOpenAI | cross-developer peerstext |
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | vs | Llama-3.1-405BMeta | cross-developer peerstext |
 Gemini 3.1 ProGoogle DeepMind | vs | Llama-3.1-405BMeta | cross-developer peerstext |
 DeepSeek-V4.1-FlashDeepSeek | vs | Llama-3.1-405BMeta | cross-developer peerstext |
Llama-3.1-405BMeta | vs | Grok 4.6xAI | cross-developer peerstext |
Llama-3.1-405BMeta | vs |  Qwen3.8-MaxQwen | cross-developer peerstext |
Llama-3.1-405BMeta | vs | Kimi-K3Moonshot AI | cross-developer peerstext |
 MiniMax-M3MiniMax | vs | Llama-3.1-405BMeta | cross-developer peerstext |
Llama-3.1-405BMeta | vs |  GLM-5.3Z.ai | cross-developer peerstext |
Llama-3.1-405BMeta | vs |  Hy4 previewTencent | cross-developer peerstext |
Seed 2.1 ProByteDance Seed | vs | Llama-3.1-405BMeta | cross-developer peerstext |
Llama-3.1-405BMeta | vs |  Mistral Large 3Mistral AI | cross-developer peerstext |
Primary Evidence
Sources and Freshness
Questions
Llama 3.1 405B vs Kimi K2.7 Code FAQs
Is Llama 3.1 405B or Kimi K2.7 Code better for coding?+
This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Llama 3.1 405B and Kimi K2.7 Code, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.
Which is cheaper, Llama 3.1 405B or Kimi K2.7 Code?+
Only Kimi K2.7 Code has a directly sourced input price: $0.68 per million tokens. Only Kimi K2.7 Code has a directly sourced output price: $3.21 per million tokens.
Which has a larger context window, Llama 3.1 405B or Kimi K2.7 Code?+
Kimi K2.7 Code has the larger sourced context window. Llama 3.1 405B supports 131K and Kimi K2.7 Code supports 262K.
Which performs better in benchmarks, Llama 3.1 405B 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 Llama 3.1 405B or Kimi K2.7 Code be self-hosted?+
Both models have the same recorded self-hosting status: supported. Llama 3.1 405B is open weight; Kimi K2.7 Code is open weight.
Can Llama 3.1 405B and Kimi K2.7 Code understand images?+
Llama 3.1 405B is not 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, Llama 3.1 405B or Kimi K2.7 Code?+
Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. Llama 3.1 405B is — and Kimi K2.7 Code is —.
Do Llama 3.1 405B and Kimi K2.7 Code support reasoning and tool use?+
Llama 3.1 405B: none of these features are definitively sourced. Kimi K2.7 Code: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Feature support does not establish relative quality.
Which is available from more inference providers, Llama 3.1 405B or Kimi K2.7 Code?+
Llama 3.1 405B has 1 sourced provider route; Kimi K2.7 Code has 4, so Kimi K2.7 Code has broader tracked availability.
Which offers better value, Llama 3.1 405B 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.