Model comparison
Celeris-1 vs Kimi K3
Head-to-head evidence from 0 shared benchmark results across 0 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Celeris-1 unranked (Not scored); Kimi K3 #4 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Celeris-1 and Kimi K3 share 0 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 1 result is unique to Celeris-1; 57 to Kimi K3.
Updated July 24, 2026- Shared results
- 0
- Celeris-1 only
- 1
- Kimi K3 only
- 57
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Treat this as a split decision. Celeris-1 makes more sense if knowledge is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill; Kimi K3 is the better fit if you need the larger 1.05M context window or you want the stronger reasoning-first profile.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 0 shared benchmark results across 0 evidence categories; 1 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
Celeris-1 and Kimi K3 finish on the same BenchAlign overall score, so this is less about a single winner and more about where the edge shows up. The BenchAlign headline says tie; the benchmark table is where the real choice happens.
Kimi K3 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $3.00 input / $15.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $2.00 input / $6.00 output per 1M tokens for Celeris-1. That is roughly 2.5x on output cost alone. Kimi K3 is the reasoning model in the pair, while Celeris-1 is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. Kimi K3 gives you the larger context window at 1.05M, compared with 8K for Celeris-1.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Celeris-1 | Kimi K3 | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Celeris-1$2 input / $6 output | Kimi K3$3 input / $15 output | Celeris-1 has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Celeris-1Not available | Kimi K3Not available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Celeris-1Not available | Kimi K3Not available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Celeris-18K | Kimi K31.05M | Kimi K3 lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic21 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Celeris-1 | Kimi K3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 88.3% | Not comparable |
| BrowseCompSource | — | 91.2% | Not comparable |
| DeepSearchQASource | — | 95.0% | Not comparable |
| Toolathlon-VerifiedSource | — | 73.2% | Not comparable |
| MCP AtlasSource | — | 84.2% | Not comparable |
| AutomationBenchSource | — | 30.8% | Not comparable |
| JobBenchSource | — | 52.9% | Not comparable |
| APEX-AgentsSource | — | 37.6% | Not comparable |
| SpreadsheetBench 2Source | — | 34.8% | Not comparable |
| DECK-BenchSource | — | 73.5% | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | — | 50.1% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 59.0% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 1679 | Not comparable |
| AA BriefcaseSource | — | 1543 | Not comparable |
| AA AutomationBenchSource | — | 52.7% | Not comparable |
| AA EnterpriseOps-GymSource | — | 45.3% | Not comparable |
| AA Harvey LABSource | — | 94.6% | Not comparable |
| AA Tau3 BankingSource | — | 33.4% | Not comparable |
| aaTerminalBench21Source | — | 85% | Not comparable |
| APEX-Agents-AASource | — | 41.3% | Not comparable |
| AA ITBenchSource | — | 47.7% | Not comparable |
Coding9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Celeris-1 | Kimi K3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| deepSweSource | — | 67.5% | Not comparable |
| FrontierSWESource | — | 81.2% | Not comparable |
| ProgramBenchSource | — | 77.8% | Not comparable |
| Kimi Code Bench v2Source | — | 72.9% | Not comparable |
| sweMarathonSource | — | 42% | Not comparable |
| PostTrain BenchSource | — | 36.6% | Not comparable |
| MLS-Bench LiteSource | — | 48.3% | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | — | 76.2% | Not comparable |
| AA-SciCodeSource | — | 58.7% | Not comparable |
Reasoning2 benchmarks
KnowledgeCeleris-1 wins11 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Celeris-1 | Kimi K3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU-ProSource | 75.9% | — | Not comparable |
| GPQASource | — | 93.5% | Not comparable |
| GPQA-DSource | — | 93.5% | Not comparable |
| HLESource | — | 56% | Not comparable |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | — | 43.5% | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | — | 57.1% | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | — | 93.5% | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | — | 44.3% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | — | 18.4% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | — | 46.0% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | — | 50.9% | Not comparable |
Multimodal15 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Celeris-1 | Kimi K3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| OfficeQA ProSource | — | 63.3% | Not comparable |
| MMMU-ProSource | — | 81.6% | Not comparable |
| MMMU-Pro w/ PythonSource | — | 83.4% | Not comparable |
| CharXiv w/o toolsSource | — | 84.8% | Not comparable |
| CharXivSource | — | 91.3% | Not comparable |
| MathVisionSource | — | 94.3% | Not comparable |
| MathVision w/ PythonSource | — | 97.8% | Not comparable |
| BabyVision w/ PythonSource | — | 85.7% | Not comparable |
| ZeroBenchSource | — | 23.0% | Not comparable |
| ZeroBench w/ PythonSource | — | 41.0% | Not comparable |
| WorldVQA ForceAnswerSource | — | 51.0% | Not comparable |
| OmniDocBenchSource | — | 91.1% | Not comparable |
| PerceptionBenchSource | — | 58.5% | Not comparable |
| AA-MMMU-ProSource | — | 80.5% | Not comparable |
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | — | 1386 | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, Celeris-1 or Kimi K3?
Celeris-1 and Kimi K3 are tied on the BenchAlign overall score, so the right pick depends on which category matters most for your use case.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, Celeris-1 or Kimi K3?
Celeris-1 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 75.9 versus 61. Kimi K3 stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
Choose a model with this week’s evidence
Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.
One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.