Skip to main content

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.7 vs Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning)

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 16 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

71.63/100
Margin
12.6pts
← winning
59.06/100
0 category wins0 category wins

BenchAlign evidence: Claude Opus 4.7 supported; Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) estimated. Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Claude Opus 4.7 and Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) share 16 comparable benchmark results. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 6 results are unique to Claude Opus 4.7; 12 to Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning).

Updated July 15, 2026
Shared results
16
Claude Opus 4.7 only
6
Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) only
12
Comparable categories
0 / 8

Benchmark data for Claude Opus 4.7 and Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) is coming soon on BenchLM.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 16 shared benchmark results across 6 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 has partial data for these models, but not enough overlapping benchmark coverage to produce a fair score-level comparison yet.

Claude Opus 4.7 is priced at $5.00 input / $25.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.60 input / $3.00 output per 1M tokens for Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning). Claude Opus 4.7 has the larger context window at 1M, compared with 128K for Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning).

Category breakdown

Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.

Category scores and score margins for Claude Opus 4.7 and Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning)
CategoryClaude Opus 4.7ΔKimi K2.5 (Reasoning)
AgenticClaude Opus 4.7Not measuredMarginNo overlapKimi K2.5 (Reasoning)55.0
CodingClaude Opus 4.7Not measuredMarginNo overlapKimi K2.5 (Reasoning)76.8
KnowledgeClaude Opus 4.7Not measuredMarginNo overlapKimi K2.5 (Reasoning)87.2
MathClaude Opus 4.738.6MarginNo overlapKimi K2.5 (Reasoning)Not measured
MultimodalClaude Opus 4.7Not measuredMarginNo overlapKimi K2.5 (Reasoning)78.5

Operational comparison

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

MetricClaude Opus 4.7Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning)Comparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensClaude Opus 4.7$5 input / $25 outputKimi K2.5 (Reasoning)$0.6 input / $3 outputKimi K2.5 (Reasoning) has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per secondClaude Opus 4.7Not availableKimi K2.5 (Reasoning)Not availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenClaude Opus 4.7Not availableKimi K2.5 (Reasoning)Not availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensClaude Opus 4.71MKimi K2.5 (Reasoning)128KClaude Opus 4.7 lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning)Result
τ²-bench resultsSource 74%95.9%Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) leads
Gert LabsSource 65.59%32.58%Claude Opus 4.7 leads
ResearchClawBenchSource 20.7%Not comparable
OSWorld 2.0Source 13.9%Not comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 50.8%Not comparable
BrowseCompSource 60.6%Not comparable
APEX-Agents-AASource 11.5%Not comparable
AA Agentic IndexSource 21.7%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 25.4%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 1009Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning)Result
Vibe Code BenchSource 71.00%17.54%Claude Opus 4.7 leads
React Native EvalsSource 82.8%Not comparable
Terminal-Bench HardSource 54.5%34.8%Claude Opus 4.7 leads
AA-SciCodeSource 50.1%49.0%Claude Opus 4.7 leads
FrontierCodeSource 38.5%Not comparable
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 76.8%Not comparable
AA Coding IndexSource 46.8%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning)Result
AA-LCRSource 67.0%65.3%Claude Opus 4.7 leads
CritPtSource 5.1%3.1%Claude Opus 4.7 leads
Knowledge
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning)Result
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 42.7%35.4%Claude Opus 4.7 leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 88.5%87.9%Claude Opus 4.7 leads
AA-HLESource 31.2%29.4%Claude Opus 4.7 leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource 14.2%-8.1%Claude Opus 4.7 leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 43.5%34.3%Claude Opus 4.7 leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 51.9%64.6%Claude Opus 4.7 leads
GPQASource 87.6%Not comparable
MMLU-ProSource 87.1%Not comparable
Math
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning)Result
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 43.793%Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source 22.917%Not comparable
AIME 2025Source 96.1%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning)Result
AA-MMMU-ProSource 76.4%75.4%Claude Opus 4.7 leads
Design Arena WebsiteSource 13281284Claude Opus 4.7 leads
MMMU-ProSource 78.5%Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning)Result
AA-IFBenchSource 43.6%70.2%Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) leads
Frequently Asked Questions (3)

Can I compare Claude Opus 4.7 and Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) 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 4.7 and Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) today?

Claude Opus 4.7: $5.00 input / $25.00 output per 1M tokens Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning): $0.60 input / $3.00 output per 1M tokens Both model pages still include creator, context window, reasoning mode, and other metadata while benchmark coverage fills in.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 15, 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.