Pairwise benchmark snapshot · Aug 1, 2026
In this head-to-head showdown, Kimi K2.5 Max delivers higher overall intelligence and human-preferred responses (Elo 1,515 vs 1,280), while Kimi K2.5 Max leads in SWE-bench software engineering benchmarks (71.3%), while Kimi K2.5 Max is more budget-friendly at $2/1M per 1M output tokens, while Claude 3.5 Sonnet provides faster response streaming (80 tok/s). Review the complete breakdown below to determine which model best fits your performance and budget requirements.
8 direct benchmark disciplines evaluated across capability, speed, and cost
2024 workhorse. Still a high-intent compare against GPT-4o.
Moonshot flagship reasoning model with high-fidelity coding, deep thinking, and tool use across a 200k context.
Simulate accuracy gains vs added response time & token cost
Reasoning models “think before answering” by generating internal reasoning tokens. Higher effort improves math, coding, and logic accuracy, but increases response delay and token costs.
Δ 235 Arena Elo pts
80 tok/s
$2 / 1M output
Relative percentile scores computed across all active models in the benchmark catalog.
Comparing top Western standard models with China's leading frontier rival across 6 skill dimensions. Tap any spoke or dot to inspect.
Category wins across reasoning intelligence, generation speed, and token cost.
Preference Elo, Coding proficiency, SWE-bench & LiveBench accuracy
Generation throughput and time to first token responsiveness
Cost per million tokens and max context window length
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Kimi K2.5 Max | Advantage Delta |
|---|---|---|---|
| Preference Elo | +235 | ||
| Coding Elo | — | — | |
| LiveBench | +15.1% | ||
| SWE-bench | +22.3% | ||
| GPQA Diamond | +22.6% | ||
| Time to first token | +10 ms | ||
| Output speed | 80 tok/s | 72 tok/s | +8 tok/s |
| Input price | $0.5/1M | +$2.5/1M | |
| Output price | +$13/1M | ||
| Context window | — |
Simulate monthly production API costs in USD (US Dollar).
Kimi K2.5 Max is estimated to save $282.50/month ($3,390/year).
Higher SWE-bench (71.3%).
Lower output list price ($2/1M).
Lower TTFT (270 ms).
Larger window (200k).
Both accept images. Defaulting to the higher-Elo side (Kimi K2.5 Max).
| Target Workload | Recommended Pick | Evaluation Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| Repo / coding agents | Kimi K2.5 Max | Higher SWE-bench (71.3%). |
| High-volume chat | Kimi K2.5 Max | Lower output list price ($2/1M). |
| Voice / low-latency UI | Kimi K2.5 Max | Lower TTFT (270 ms). |
| Long-document RAG | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Larger window (200k). |
| Screenshots / vision | Kimi K2.5 Max | Both accept images. Defaulting to the higher-Elo side (Kimi K2.5 Max). |
No comments posted on this matchup yet. Be the first to share an evaluation note!
Dynamic OpenGraph banner generated at /compare/claude-3-5-sonnet-vs-kimi-k2-5/opengraph-image
Verified Head-to-Head Telemetry