Skip to main content

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.5 vs Kimi 3

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 0 shared benchmark results across 0 categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.

Benchmark data for one or both models is coming soon. This page currently shows metadata and pricing where BenchLM has it, and score-level comparisons will populate as public benchmark results land.
72/100
No comparison
Moonshot AI
N/A
0 category wins0 category wins

Verified leaderboard positions: Claude Opus 4.5 #19; Kimi 3 unranked

Evidence parity. Claude Opus 4.5 and Kimi 3 share 0 comparable benchmark results. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 60 results are unique to Claude Opus 4.5; 0 to Kimi 3.

Updated July 14, 2026
Shared results
0
Claude Opus 4.5 only
60
Kimi 3 only
0
Comparable categories
0 / 8

Benchmark data for Claude Opus 4.5 and Kimi 3 is coming soon on BenchLM.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 0 shared benchmark results across 0 evidence categories; 0 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

BenchLM does not have sourced benchmark coverage for Kimi 3 yet. This comparison is currently limited to metadata such as context window, reasoning mode, and pricing where available.

Claude Opus 4.5 has the larger context window at 200K, compared with null for Kimi 3.

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

MetricClaude Opus 4.5Kimi 3Comparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensClaude Opus 4.5$5 input / $25 outputKimi 3Not availableA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondClaude Opus 4.546 tok/sKimi 3Not availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenClaude Opus 4.51.01 sKimi 3Not availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensClaude Opus 4.5200KKimi 3Not availableA complete context comparison is not available.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Kimi 3Result
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 59.3%Not comparable
OSWorld-VerifiedSource 66.3%Not comparable
OSWorldSource 66.3%Not comparable
Claw-EvalSource 59.6%Not comparable
QwenClawBenchSource 52.3%Not comparable
TAU3-BenchSource 70.2%Not comparable
VITA-BenchSource 23.3%Not comparable
DeepPlanningSource 26.4%Not comparable
ToolathlonSource 43.5%Not comparable
MCP AtlasSource 42.3%Not comparable
MCP-TasksSource 71.8%Not comparable
WideResearchSource 76.4%Not comparable
CyberGymSource 50.6%Not comparable
Tau2-TelecomSource 86.3%Not comparable
Gert LabsSource 64.23%Not comparable
JobBenchSource 32.3%Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Kimi 3Result
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 80.9%Not comparable
LiveCodeBench v6Source 84.8%Not comparable
SWE-bench ProSource 57.1%Not comparable
SWE MultilingualSource 77.5%Not comparable
NL2RepoSource 43.2%Not comparable
Terminal-Bench HardSource 40.9%Not comparable
AA-SciCodeSource 47.0%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Kimi 3Result
LongBench v2Source 64.4%Not comparable
AI-NeedleSource 74%Not comparable
AA-LCRSource 65.3%Not comparable
CritPtSource 0.3%Not comparable
Knowledge
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Kimi 3Result
GPQASource 87%Not comparable
SuperGPQASource 70.6%Not comparable
MMLU-ProSource 89.5%Not comparable
MMLU-ReduxSource 96.6%Not comparable
C-EvalSource 92.2%Not comparable
HLESource 30.8%Not comparable
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 34.7%Not comparable
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 81.0%Not comparable
AA-HLESource 12.9%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -3.9%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 40.7%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 75.4%Not comparable
AA MMLU-ProSource 88.9%Not comparable
Math
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Kimi 3Result
AIME26Source 95.1%Not comparable
HMMT Feb 2025Source 92.9%Not comparable
HMMT Nov 2025Source 93.3%Not comparable
HMMT Feb 2026Source 85.3%Not comparable
MMAnswerBenchSource 84.0%Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 20.690%Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source 4.167%Not comparable
Multilingual
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Kimi 3Result
MMLU-ProXSource 85.7%Not comparable
NOVA-63Source 56.7%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Kimi 3Result
MMMU-ProSource 70.6%Not comparable
MathVisionSource 74.3%Not comparable
CharXivSource 68.5%Not comparable
VideoMMMUSource 84.4%Not comparable
ScreenSpot ProSource 45.7%Not comparable
V*Source 67.0%Not comparable
AA-MMMU-ProSource 71.2%Not comparable
Design Arena WebsiteSource 1281Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Kimi 3Result
IFEvalSource 90.9%Not comparable
IFBenchSource 58%Not comparable
AA-IFBenchSource 43.0%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (3)

Can I compare Claude Opus 4.5 and Kimi 3 on BenchLM yet?

Not fully yet. BenchLM is tracking both models, but the sourced benchmark breakdown for this comparison is still coming soon.

Why does this comparison show “coming soon”?

BenchLM only shows category winners and benchmark-level calls when we have sourced results that can be compared fairly. For these models, the public benchmark coverage is not complete enough yet.

What data is available for Claude Opus 4.5 and Kimi 3 today?

Claude Opus 4.5: $5.00 input / $25.00 output per 1M tokens Kimi 3: Pricing unavailable Both model pages still include creator, context window, reasoning mode, and other metadata while benchmark coverage fills in.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 14, 2026

The AI models change fast. We track them for you.

A weekly brief for engineers and researchers covering new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.

Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.