Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.5 vs Kimi K2.7 Code

Claude Opus 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.5 to 43.3 on the Noometry Index. Kimi K2.7 Code costs 5.8× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.5 Anthropic

50.5

Rank #47 Confirmed

Kimi K2.7 Code Moonshot AI

43.3

Rank #94 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.5 scores higher in 4 categories and Kimi K2.7 Code in 1 category; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in agentic & tool use, where Claude Opus 4.5 leads 47.3 to 24.0.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3): 34.4% for Claude Opus 4.5 and 54% for Kimi K2.7 Code.
  • Kimi K2.7 Code is cheaper at $0.95 / $4 per million input/output tokens, against $5 / $25 for Claude Opus 4.5.
  • Kimi K2.7 Code accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 200K.
  • Kimi K2.7 Code has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4.5Kimi K2.7 Code
ProviderAnthropicMoonshot AI
Noometry Index50.543.3
Released2025-11-012026-06-12
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window200K262K
Max output64K262K
Input $ / M tokens$5$0.95
Output $ / M tokens$25$4
Results tracked6919

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 54.8 (#27), Kimi K2.7 Code: 42.9 (#95)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Kimi K2.7 Code
LMArena WebDev14941473
WeirdML63.7%54.1%
ALE-Bench1,025886.23
SWE-bench Verified76.7%—
DeepSWE—30.5%
FrontierCode—30.1%
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)76.8%—
SWE-bench Multilingual70.7%—
SciCode—47.5%
GSO26.5%—
LMArena Coding1504—
AlgoTune1.77—

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 47.3 (#12), Kimi K2.7 Code: 24.0 (#122)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Kimi K2.7 Code
Vending-Bench 24,9675,083
Terminal-Bench63.1%—
APEX-Agents—37.6%
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard77.5%—
GDPval45.5%—
Remote Labor Index3.8%—
τ²-bench Airline84%—
τ²-bench Banking24.7%—
τ²-bench Retail79.6%—
τ²-bench Telecom92.3%—
Cybench82%—
DeepResearch Bench54.8%—
OSWorld66.3%—
BALROG43.5%—
GBAEval—0.9%
LMArena Search1180—
METR Time Horizons75%—

Reasoning Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 42.6 (#51), Kimi K2.7 Code: 39.0 (#61)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Kimi K2.7 Code
SimpleBench62%57.9%
Chess Puzzles12%21%
Epoch Capabilities Index150.09149.97
ARC-AGI-237.6%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark80.2%—
NYT Connections (extended)52.5%—
ARC-AGI-180%—
CritPt—10%
EnigmaEval11.9%—
EBR-Bench14.3%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1476—
Mystery Game Puzzles22%—
DTBench89.9%—
LMCA44.5%—
Surface Evolver Bench—48.8%
ForecastBench60.7—

Math Kimi K2.7 Code leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 38.6 (#132), Kimi K2.7 Code: 52.9 (#48)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Kimi K2.7 Code
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)34.4%54%
FrontierMath Tier 44.9%12.2%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202586.1%95.6%
ProofBench36%—
LMArena Math1463—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)20.7%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)4.2%—

Knowledge Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 56.5 (#44), Kimi K2.7 Code: 53.5 (#57)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Kimi K2.7 Code
GPQA Diamond86%87.9%
SimpleQA Verified45.7%36.5%
Humanity's Last Exam25.2%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate10.9%—
LMArena Expert1487—

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.5: 31.4 (#107), Kimi K2.7 Code: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Kimi K2.7 Code
GeoBench75%—
VPCT40%—
Furniture Assembly28.3%—
LMArena Document1462—

Multilingual Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.5: 54.3 (#47), Kimi K2.7 Code: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Kimi K2.7 Code
LMArena Non-English1438—
LMArena Chinese1470—
LMArena French1471—
LMArena German1449—
LMArena Japanese1416—
LMArena Korean1424—
LMArena Russian1447—
LMArena Spanish1458—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.5: 77.5 (#19), Kimi K2.7 Code: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Kimi K2.7 Code
LMArena Instruction Following1478—

Long Context Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.5: 46.5 (#22), Kimi K2.7 Code: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Kimi K2.7 Code
CL-bench21.1%—
LMArena Longer Query1480—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.5: 68.1 (#28), Kimi K2.7 Code: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Kimi K2.7 Code
LMArena Text1451—
LMArena Creative Writing1445—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1687—
LMArena Multi-Turn1466—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4.5 better than Kimi K2.7 Code?

Claude Opus 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.5 to 43.3 on the Noometry Index. Kimi K2.7 Code costs 5.8× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.5 or Kimi K2.7 Code?

Kimi K2.7 Code is cheaper. It lists at $0.95 per million input tokens and $4 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4.5 lists at $5 and $25.

Is Claude Opus 4.5 or Kimi K2.7 Code better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 54.8 versus 42.9 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Kimi K2.7 Code does, with 262K tokens against 200K.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.5 and Kimi K2.7 Code share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.5 has 69 scored results on Noometry and Kimi K2.7 Code has 19.

Related comparisons

Go deeper