Model comparison
Gemini 2.5 Pro vs Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo
Gemini 2.5 Pro and Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo score almost the same on the Noometry Index (45.0 vs 45.8), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Last verified . 21 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- They share 21 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.5 Pro scores higher in 6 categories and Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo in 2 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in long context, where Gemini 2.5 Pro leads 59.8 to 43.2.
- Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemini 2.5 Pro | Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Moonshot AI | |
| Noometry Index | 45.0 | 45.8 |
| Released | 2025-03-25 | 2025-11-06 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 1.05M | — |
| Max output | 66K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $1.25 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $10 | — |
| Results tracked | 78 | 21 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 42.4 (#101), Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 38.4 (#178)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1227 | 1322 |
| LMArena Coding | 1452 | 1454 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 57.6% | — |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 53.6% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | 83.1% | — |
| SciCode | 42.8% | — |
| GSO | 3.9% | — |
| WeirdML | 54% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 85.9% | — |
| CadEval | 64% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 785.52 | — |
| AlgoTune | 1.51 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 29.2 (#88), Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 32.6% | — |
| GDPval | 23.3% | — |
| Remote Labor Index | 0.8% | — |
| TheAgentCompany | 30.3% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | 13.7% | — |
| DeepResearch Bench | 42.8% | — |
| BALROG | 43.3% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1142 | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 55.4% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 573.64 | — |
Reasoning Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo leads
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 28.8 (#99), Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 32.5 (#75)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 20% | 20% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1455 | 1428 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 4.9% | — |
| SimpleBench | 62.4% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 70.3% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 41% | — |
| CritPt | 2% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 5.6% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 89.8% | — |
| DTBench | 82.4% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 79.9% | — |
| LMCA | 34.8% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 145.32 | — |
| ForecastBench | 61.3 | — |
| LiveBench | 82.3% | — |
Math Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo leads
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 32.5 (#213), Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 47.4 (#68)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 84.7% | 83.1% |
| LMArena Math | 1450 | 1429 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 24.6% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 0% | — |
| Omni-MATH | 41.6% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 90.2% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 95.9% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 14.1% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 4.2% | — |
Knowledge Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 56.0 (#46), Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 50.9 (#69)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 85.3% | 84.2% |
| LMArena Expert | 1452 | 1439 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 21.6% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 86.3% | — |
| Confabulations | 10.6% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 7% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 74.9% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 45.2 (#18), Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1263 | — |
| GeoBench | 86% | — |
| VPCT | 48% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1421 | — |
| SpatialViz-Bench | 44.7% | — |
Multilingual Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 55.3 (#31), Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 51.4 (#109)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1451 | 1398 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1507 | 1456 |
| LMArena French | 1472 | 1425 |
| LMArena German | 1487 | 1390 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1461 | 1357 |
| LMArena Korean | 1434 | 1330 |
| LMArena Russian | 1461 | 1391 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1473 | 1406 |
Instruction Following Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 75.0 (#75), Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 74.0 (#109)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1437 | 1403 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 80.6% | — |
| IFEval | 84% | — |
Long Context Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 59.8 (#5), Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 43.2 (#102)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1449 | 1415 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 91.7% | — |
Writing & Preference Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 63.7 (#62), Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 60.0 (#104)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1458 | 1415 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1454 | 1374 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1453 | 1414 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 83.8% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1421 | — |
| WildBench | 85.7% | — |
| LiveBench Language | 67.8% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 2.5 Pro better than Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo?
Gemini 2.5 Pro and Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo score almost the same on the Noometry Index (45.0 vs 45.8), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Is Gemini 2.5 Pro or Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo better for coding?
Gemini 2.5 Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.4 versus 38.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.5 Pro and Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo share?
21 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.5 Pro has 78 scored results on Noometry and Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo has 21.