Model comparison

Claude Opus 4 vs Kimi K2 (Jul 2025)

Claude Opus 4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.1 to 41.2 on the Noometry Index. Kimi K2 (Jul 2025) costs 30× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 38 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4 Anthropic

43.1

Rank #100 Confirmed

Kimi K2 (Jul 2025) Moonshot AI

41.2

Rank #140 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 38 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4 scores higher in 5 categories and Kimi K2 (Jul 2025) in 4 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Claude Opus 4 leads 44.0 to 37.3.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is SimpleBench: 58.8% for Claude Opus 4 and 26.3% for Kimi K2 (Jul 2025).
  • Kimi K2 (Jul 2025) is cheaper at $0.57 / $2.30 per million input/output tokens, against $15 / $75 for Claude Opus 4.
  • Kimi K2 (Jul 2025) accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 200K.
  • Kimi K2 (Jul 2025) has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4 and Kimi K2 (Jul 2025) specifications
Claude Opus 4Kimi K2 (Jul 2025)
ProviderAnthropicMoonshot AI
Noometry Index43.141.2
Released2025-05-222025-07-12
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window200K262K
Max output32K262K
Input $ / M tokens$15$0.57
Output $ / M tokens$75$2.30
Results tracked5642

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

Category by category

Coding Claude Opus 4 leads

Claude Opus 4: 47.2 (#62), Kimi K2 (Jul 2025): 42.4 (#102)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4Kimi K2 (Jul 2025)
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)67.6%63.4%
Aider Polyglot72%59.1%
GSO6.9%4.9%
WeirdML43.7%42.8%
LMArena Coding14421399
SWE-bench Verified70.7%—
ALE-Bench—597.5
AlgoTune1.33—

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 4 leads

Claude Opus 4: 34.8 (#42), Kimi K2 (Jul 2025): 32.4 (#64)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4Kimi K2 (Jul 2025)
METR Time Horizons63.9%59.2%
Terminal-Bench—35.7%
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—59.1%
Cybench38%—
DeepResearch Bench46.8%—
LMArena Search1127—

Reasoning Claude Opus 4 leads

Claude Opus 4: 27.3 (#121), Kimi K2 (Jul 2025): 23.3 (#179)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4Kimi K2 (Jul 2025)
SimpleBench58.8%26.3%
Kagi LLM Benchmark74.3%64.4%
LMArena Hard Prompts13991384
Epoch Capabilities Index142.67146.01
ForecastBench61.160.2
ARC-AGI-28.6%—
ARC-AGI-135.7%—
CritPt0.3%—
EnigmaEval5.6%—
DTBench81.6%—
LMCA37.4%—

Math Too close to call

Claude Opus 4: 42.0 (#86), Kimi K2 (Jul 2025): 42.7 (#83)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4Kimi K2 (Jul 2025)
Omni-MATH61.6%65.4%
LMArena Math13901397
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)4.5%21.4%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)4.2%0%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202564.4%—
MATH Level 585%—

Knowledge Claude Opus 4 leads

Claude Opus 4: 44.0 (#88), Kimi K2 (Jul 2025): 37.3 (#157)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4Kimi K2 (Jul 2025)
MMLU-Pro87.5%81.9%
Confabulations15.9%20.4%
Vectara Hallucination Rate12%17.9%
GPQA (HELM)70.8%65.3%
LMArena Expert13861365
GPQA Diamond76.3%—
Humanity's Last Exam10.7%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 4: 31.5 (#106), Kimi K2 (Jul 2025): —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4Kimi K2 (Jul 2025)
LMArena Vision1192—
GeoBench49%—
VPCT38%—

Multilingual Too close to call

Claude Opus 4: 48.8 (#138), Kimi K2 (Jul 2025): 49.6 (#130)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4Kimi K2 (Jul 2025)
LMArena Non-English13621372
LMArena Chinese13861415
LMArena French13721379
LMArena German13911387
LMArena Japanese13311349
LMArena Korean13211325
LMArena Russian13921385
LMArena Spanish13891386

Instruction Following Claude Opus 4 leads

Claude Opus 4: 77.1 (#28), Kimi K2 (Jul 2025): 71.1 (#156)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4Kimi K2 (Jul 2025)
IFEval91.8%85%
LMArena Instruction Following14061348

Long Context Kimi K2 (Jul 2025) leads

Claude Opus 4: 39.6 (#172), Kimi K2 (Jul 2025): 41.2 (#145)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4Kimi K2 (Jul 2025)
Fiction.LiveBench61.1%66.7%
LMArena Longer Query14221353
CL-bench—17.6%

Writing & Preference Kimi K2 (Jul 2025) leads

Claude Opus 4: 61.2 (#89), Kimi K2 (Jul 2025): 62.3 (#78)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4Kimi K2 (Jul 2025)
LMArena Text13771380
LMArena Creative Writing13871350
Short-Story Creative Writing83.6%85.6%
EQ-Bench Creative Writing15801666
WildBench85.2%86.2%
LMArena Multi-Turn13961371

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4 better than Kimi K2 (Jul 2025)?

Claude Opus 4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.1 to 41.2 on the Noometry Index. Kimi K2 (Jul 2025) costs 30× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4 or Kimi K2 (Jul 2025)?

Kimi K2 (Jul 2025) is cheaper. It lists at $0.57 per million input tokens and $2.30 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4 lists at $15 and $75.

Is Claude Opus 4 or Kimi K2 (Jul 2025) better for coding?

Claude Opus 4 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 47.2 versus 42.4 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Kimi K2 (Jul 2025) does, with 262K tokens against 200K.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4 and Kimi K2 (Jul 2025) share?

38 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4 has 56 scored results on Noometry and Kimi K2 (Jul 2025) has 42.

Related comparisons

Go deeper