Model comparison
Kimi K2.7 Code vs Mercury 2.5
Kimi K2.7 Code is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.3 to 33.5 on the Noometry Index. Mercury 2.5 costs 25× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Kimi K2.7 Code's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 3 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 3 benchmarks with published results for both. Kimi K2.7 Code scores higher in 3 categories and Mercury 2.5 in 0 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Kimi K2.7 Code leads 52.9 to 23.3.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is CritPt: 10% for Kimi K2.7 Code and 0% for Mercury 2.5.
- Mercury 2.5 is cheaper at $0.04 / $0.15 per million input/output tokens, against $0.95 / $4 for Kimi K2.7 Code.
- Kimi K2.7 Code accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 260K.
- Kimi K2.7 Code has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Kimi K2.7 Code | Mercury 2.5 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Moonshot AI | Inception |
| Noometry Index | 43.3 | 33.5 |
| Released | 2026-06-12 | 2026-09-08 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 262K | 260K |
| Max output | 262K | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.95 | $0.04 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $4 | $0.15 |
| Results tracked | 19 | 4 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Kimi K2.7 Code leads
Kimi K2.7 Code: 42.9 (#95), Mercury 2.5: 39.5 (#156)
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.7 Code | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 47.5% | 38.5% |
| ALE-Bench | 886.23 | 301.65 |
| DeepSWE | 30.5% | — |
| FrontierCode | 30.1% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1473 | — |
| WeirdML | 54.1% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Kimi K2.7 Code: 24.0 (#122), Mercury 2.5: —
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.7 Code | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 37.6% | — |
| GBAEval | 0.9% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 5,083 | — |
Reasoning Kimi K2.7 Code leads
Kimi K2.7 Code: 39.0 (#61), Mercury 2.5: 22.4 (#193)
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.7 Code | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 10% | 0% |
| SimpleBench | 57.9% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 21% | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 48.8% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 149.97 | — |
Math Kimi K2.7 Code leads
Kimi K2.7 Code: 52.9 (#48), Mercury 2.5: 23.3 (#272)
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.7 Code | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 54% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 12.2% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 95.6% | — |
| ProofBench | — | 3% |
Knowledge Not comparable
Kimi K2.7 Code: 53.5 (#57), Mercury 2.5: —
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.7 Code | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 87.9% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 36.5% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Kimi K2.7 Code better than Mercury 2.5?
Kimi K2.7 Code is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.3 to 33.5 on the Noometry Index. Mercury 2.5 costs 25× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Kimi K2.7 Code's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Kimi K2.7 Code or Mercury 2.5?
Mercury 2.5 is cheaper. It lists at $0.04 per million input tokens and $0.15 per million output tokens; Kimi K2.7 Code lists at $0.95 and $4.
Is Kimi K2.7 Code or Mercury 2.5 better for coding?
Kimi K2.7 Code scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.9 versus 39.5 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Kimi K2.7 Code does, with 262K tokens against 260K.
How many benchmarks do Kimi K2.7 Code and Mercury 2.5 share?
3 benchmarks have published results for both models. Kimi K2.7 Code has 19 scored results on Noometry and Mercury 2.5 has 4.