Noometry

Model comparison

Grok 4.5 vs Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo

Grok 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 55.0 to 45.8 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 21 shared benchmarks.

Grok 4.5 xAI

55.0

Rank #25 Confirmed

Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo Moonshot AI

45.8

Rank #70 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 21 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.5 scores higher in 8 categories and Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok 4.5 leads 56.1 to 32.5.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is Chess Puzzles: 36% for Grok 4.5 and 20% for Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo.
  • Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Grok 4.5Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo
ProviderxAIMoonshot AI
Noometry Index55.045.8
Released2026-07-082025-11-06
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window500K—
Max output500K—
Input $ / M tokens$2—
Output $ / M tokens$6—
Results tracked5221

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

Category by category

Coding Grok 4.5 leads

Grok 4.5: 52.2 (#35), Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 38.4 (#178)

BenchmarkGrok 4.5Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo
LMArena WebDev15531322
LMArena Coding14741454
DeepSWE53.8%—
FrontierCode42.4%—
SciCode54.1%—
WeirdML46.4%—
ALE-Bench1,309—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Grok 4.5: 44.4 (#17), Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.5Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo
APEX-Agents56.2%—
τ²-bench Banking47.9%—
PostTrainBench23.4%—
GBAEval65.4%—
GDP.pdf14%—
LMArena Search1213—
Vending-Bench 23,887—

Reasoning Grok 4.5 leads

Grok 4.5: 56.1 (#25), Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 32.5 (#75)

BenchmarkGrok 4.5Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo
Chess Puzzles36%20%
LMArena Hard Prompts14621428
ARC-AGI-252.6%—
SimpleBench70%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark83.5%—
NYT Connections (extended)79.9%—
ARC-AGI-187.2%—
CritPt15.4%—
DTBench96.5%—
LMCA45.2%—
Surface Evolver Bench74.4%—
Epoch Capabilities Index153.92—

Math Grok 4.5 leads

Grok 4.5: 60.9 (#35), Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 47.4 (#68)

BenchmarkGrok 4.5Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202597.8%83.1%
LMArena Math14591429
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)57.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 424.4%—
ProofBench31%—

Knowledge Grok 4.5 leads

Grok 4.5: 62.3 (#24), Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 50.9 (#69)

BenchmarkGrok 4.5Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo
GPQA Diamond93.4%84.2%
LMArena Expert14661439
SimpleQA Verified48.3%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Grok 4.5: 37.6 (#72), Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.5Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo
LMArena Vision1288—
Blueprint-Bench 227.3%—
Furniture Assembly22.5%—
LMArena Document1452—

Multilingual Grok 4.5 leads

Grok 4.5: 54.4 (#42), Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 51.4 (#109)

BenchmarkGrok 4.5Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo
LMArena Non-English14401398
LMArena Chinese14961456
LMArena French14561425
LMArena German14461390
LMArena Japanese14281357
LMArena Korean14041330
LMArena Russian14481391
LMArena Spanish14501406

Instruction Following Grok 4.5 leads

Grok 4.5: 76.0 (#48), Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 74.0 (#109)

BenchmarkGrok 4.5Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo
LMArena Instruction Following14461403

Long Context Grok 4.5 leads

Grok 4.5: 44.8 (#56), Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 43.2 (#102)

BenchmarkGrok 4.5Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo
LMArena Longer Query14631415

Writing & Preference Grok 4.5 leads

Grok 4.5: 65.8 (#42), Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 60.0 (#104)

BenchmarkGrok 4.5Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo
LMArena Text14481415
LMArena Creative Writing14421374
LMArena Multi-Turn14561414
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1579—

Frequently asked questions

Is Grok 4.5 better than Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo?

Grok 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 55.0 to 45.8 on the Noometry Index.

Is Grok 4.5 or Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo better for coding?

Grok 4.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 52.2 versus 38.4 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Grok 4.5 and Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo share?

21 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.5 has 52 scored results on Noometry and Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo has 21.

Related comparisons

Go deeper