Model comparison
Claude Opus 5 vs Kimi K2.5
Claude Opus 5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 67.7 to 47.8 on the Noometry Index. Kimi K2.5 costs 11× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 35 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 35 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 5 scores higher in 9 categories and Kimi K2.5 in 1 category; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Claude Opus 5 leads 77.1 to 31.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is ARC-AGI-2: 90.4% for Claude Opus 5 and 11.8% for Kimi K2.5.
- Kimi K2.5 is cheaper at $0.45 / $2.25 per million input/output tokens, against $5 / $25 for Claude Opus 5.
- Claude Opus 5 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 262K.
- Kimi K2.5 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Claude Opus 5 | Kimi K2.5 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Moonshot AI |
| Noometry Index | 67.7 | 47.8 |
| Released | 2026-07-24 | 2026-01-27 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 1M | 262K |
| Max output | 128K | 262K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $5 | $0.45 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $25 | $2.25 |
| Results tracked | 57 | 51 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Claude Opus 5 leads
Claude Opus 5: 67.0 (#5), Kimi K2.5: 48.7 (#48)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | Kimi K2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1694 | 1436 |
| SciCode | 56.4% | 49% |
| WeirdML | 91.8% | 45.6% |
| LMArena Coding | 1533 | 1474 |
| ALE-Bench | 2,165 | 821.65 |
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 73.8% |
| DeepSWE | 73.6% | — |
| FrontierCode | 53.4% | — |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | — | 70.8% |
| CursorBench | 46.6% | — |
| SWE-bench Multilingual | — | 67.3% |
| FrontierSWE | 52% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 5 leads
Claude Opus 5: 55.5 (#1), Kimi K2.5: 34.0 (#44)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | Kimi K2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| Vending-Bench 2 | 11,182 | 1,198 |
| Terminal-Bench | — | 43.2% |
| APEX-Agents | 65.8% | — |
| OSWorld 2.0 | 31.4% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | 48.7% | — |
| OSWorld | — | 63.3% |
| PostTrainBench | 35% | — |
| BALROG | 63.4% | — |
| GBAEval | 79.6% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 24% | — |
Reasoning Claude Opus 5 leads
Claude Opus 5: 77.1 (#3), Kimi K2.5: 31.2 (#74)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | Kimi K2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-2 | 90.4% | 11.8% |
| SimpleBench | 80.6% | 46.8% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 94.3% | 69.9% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 97.5% | 65.3% |
| CritPt | 29.1% | 3.1% |
| Chess Puzzles | 42% | 12% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1525 | 1454 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 162.67 | 148.05 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 78.5% |
| EnigmaEval | — | 3.4% |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 69.4% |
| EBR-Bench | 45.7% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 59% | — |
| DTBench | 97.9% | — |
| LMCA | 64.5% | — |
| Bench to the Future 3 | 0.12 | — |
Math Claude Opus 5 leads
Claude Opus 5: 86.1 (#6), Kimi K2.5: 50.3 (#46)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | Kimi K2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 98.9% | 92.2% |
| LMArena Math | 1533 | 1470 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 85.6% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 73.2% | — |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | — | 62.3% |
| ProofBench | 99% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 27.9% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 4.2% |
Knowledge Claude Opus 5 leads
Claude Opus 5: 66.8 (#8), Kimi K2.5: 53.6 (#52)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | Kimi K2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 93.9% | 87.6% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 59.9% | 34.3% |
| LMArena Expert | 1558 | 1466 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | — | 24.4% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 14.2% |
Multimodal Claude Opus 5 leads
Claude Opus 5: 51.1 (#6), Kimi K2.5: 40.4 (#37)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | Kimi K2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1321 | 1269 |
| LMArena Document | 1516 | 1430 |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 30.4% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 60.8% | — |
Multilingual Claude Opus 5 leads
Claude Opus 5: 58.8 (#3), Kimi K2.5: 54.1 (#50)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | Kimi K2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1500 | 1433 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1575 | 1495 |
| LMArena French | 1522 | 1454 |
| LMArena German | 1522 | 1441 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1510 | 1422 |
| LMArena Korean | 1526 | 1412 |
| LMArena Russian | 1507 | 1436 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1519 | 1450 |
Instruction Following Claude Opus 5 leads
Claude Opus 5: 79.3 (#5), Kimi K2.5: 75.5 (#60)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | Kimi K2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1516 | 1431 |
Long Context Kimi K2.5 leads
Claude Opus 5: 46.5 (#20), Kimi K2.5: 52.1 (#7)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | Kimi K2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1516 | 1445 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 86.1% |
| CL-bench | — | 19.3% |
| CL-bench Life | — | 13.2% |
Writing & Preference Claude Opus 5 leads
Claude Opus 5: 79.3 (#2), Kimi K2.5: 65.3 (#51)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | Kimi K2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1506 | 1445 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1491 | 1423 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 2133 | 1579 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1496 | 1444 |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1385 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Opus 5 better than Kimi K2.5?
Claude Opus 5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 67.7 to 47.8 on the Noometry Index. Kimi K2.5 costs 11× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 5 or Kimi K2.5?
Kimi K2.5 is cheaper. It lists at $0.45 per million input tokens and $2.25 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 5 lists at $5 and $25.
Is Claude Opus 5 or Kimi K2.5 better for coding?
Claude Opus 5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 67.0 versus 48.7 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Claude Opus 5 does, with 1M tokens against 262K.
How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 5 and Kimi K2.5 share?
35 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 5 has 57 scored results on Noometry and Kimi K2.5 has 51.