Claude Opus 4.7 vs Kimi K2.5

At a Glance

Compare
Kimi K2.5Moonshot AI
Intelligence, Cost, and Efficiency
IntelligenceHigher is better · MM Intelligence v2.5#11 of 4679.0 score · 3/3 sources · completeUnrankedNot in the 46-model eligible cohort
CostLower is better · Published-token output estimate#37 of 44$0.286 per LiveBench caseUnrankedNot in the 44-model eligible cohort
EfficiencyHigher is better · MM Efficiency v1.5#20 of 3852.7 score · 3/3 sources · completeUnrankedNot in the 38-model eligible cohort
Pricing and Limits
Input priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens$5.00Anthropic · Sep 3, 2026$0.45Deepinfra · Aug 29, 2026
Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens$25.00Anthropic · Sep 3, 2026$2.25Deepinfra · Aug 29, 2026
Context windowMaximum documented tokens1,000K262K
Model facts checkedSep 3, 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

All benchmark results →
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Kimi-K2.5
LMArena Document Arenadocument-2026-09-13-d25aabda0010 · arena_rating · leader1,494.71100% of row best · rating · claude-opus-4-7-high; 95% CI [1488.20710383, 1501.21879014]; votes 21957; rank 71,430.1096% 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 · leader1,483.36100% of row best · rating · claude-opus-4-7; 95% CI [1479.49740558, 1487.21455301]; votes 61128; rank 121,445.6497% 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 · leader1,316.07100% of row best · rating · claude-opus-4-7-high; 95% CI [1309.27708749, 1322.85317424]; votes 21092; rank 51,266.9996% 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 above3 benchmark winsNo 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

FieldClaude Opus 4.7Kimi-K2.5
DeveloperAnthropicMoonshot AI
FamilyClaude 4Kimi K2 5
ModelClaude Opus 4.7Kimi-K2.5
VersionClaude Opus 4.7Kimi-K2.5
Lifecycleactiveactive
Released2026-04-162026-01-27
Knowledge cutoff2026-01-01Unknown
Input modalitiesText, ImageText, Image
Output modalitiesTextText
Context window1,000K262K
Total parametersUnknown1T
Active parametersUnknown32B
LicenseUnknownother
Open weightsNoYes
API availableYesYes
Self-hostableNoYes
Provider accessAnthropic (Standard), Deepinfra (Standard)Deepinfra (Standard), Hugging Face (Standard), Openrouter (Standard)
Capabilitieschat, generation, reasoning, structured_outputs, toolschat, generation, reasoning, tools

Claude Opus 4.7 Capabilities

chatgenerationreasoningstructured outputstools
Serving providers2
Canonical IDanthropic/claude-opus-4-7

Kimi K2.5 Capabilities

chatgenerationreasoningtools
Serving providers3
Canonical IDmoonshotai/Kimi-K2.5

Primary Evidence

Sources and Freshness

Questions

Claude Opus 4.7 vs Kimi K2.5 FAQs

Is Claude Opus 4.7 or Kimi K2.5 better for coding?+

This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Claude Opus 4.7 and Kimi K2.5, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.7 or Kimi K2.5?+

Claude Opus 4.7 is $5.00 and Kimi K2.5 is $0.45 per million tokens, so Kimi K2.5 is cheaper on this metric. Claude Opus 4.7 is $25.00 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, Claude Opus 4.7 or Kimi K2.5?+

Claude Opus 4.7 has the larger sourced context window. Claude Opus 4.7 supports 1,000K and Kimi K2.5 supports 262K.

Which performs better in benchmarks, Claude Opus 4.7 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 Claude Opus 4.7 or Kimi K2.5 be self-hosted?+

Kimi K2.5 is the only model in this pair currently marked as self-hostable. Claude Opus 4.7 is not marked open weight; Kimi K2.5 is open weight.

Can Claude Opus 4.7 and Kimi K2.5 understand images?+

Claude Opus 4.7 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, Claude Opus 4.7 or Kimi K2.5?+

Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. Claude Opus 4.7 is 128K and Kimi K2.5 is —.

Do Claude Opus 4.7 and Kimi K2.5 support reasoning and tool use?+

Claude Opus 4.7: 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, Claude Opus 4.7 or Kimi K2.5?+

Claude Opus 4.7 has 2 sourced provider routes; Kimi K2.5 has 3, so Kimi K2.5 has broader tracked availability.

Which offers better value, Claude Opus 4.7 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.

Send Feedback