Skip to main content

Model comparison

DeepSeek-R1 vs Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning)

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 11 shared benchmark results across 5 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

DeepSeek
51.67/100
Margin
7.7pts
winning →
59.35/100
0 category wins0 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: DeepSeek-R1 #103 (Supported); Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) #57 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. DeepSeek-R1 and Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) share 11 comparable benchmark results. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 0 results are unique to DeepSeek-R1; 16 to Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning).

Updated July 22, 2026
Shared results
11
DeepSeek-R1 only
0
Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) only
16
Comparable categories
0 / 8

Benchmark data for DeepSeek-R1 and Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) is coming soon on BenchLM.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 11 shared benchmark results across 5 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.

Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) is priced at $0.60 input / $3.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.55 input / $2.19 output per 1M tokens for DeepSeek-R1.

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 DeepSeek-R1 and Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning)
CategoryDeepSeek-R1ΔKimi K2.5 (Reasoning)
AgenticDeepSeek-R1Not measuredMarginNo overlapKimi K2.5 (Reasoning)55.0
CodingDeepSeek-R1Not measuredMarginNo overlapKimi K2.5 (Reasoning)76.8
KnowledgeDeepSeek-R1Not measuredMarginNo overlapKimi K2.5 (Reasoning)87.2
MultimodalDeepSeek-R1Not measuredMarginNo overlapKimi K2.5 (Reasoning)78.5

Operational comparison

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

MetricDeepSeek-R1Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning)Comparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensDeepSeek-R1$0.55 input / $2.19 outputKimi K2.5 (Reasoning)$0.6 input / $3 outputDeepSeek-R1 has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per secondDeepSeek-R1Not availableKimi K2.5 (Reasoning)Not availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenDeepSeek-R1Not availableKimi K2.5 (Reasoning)Not availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensDeepSeek-R1128KKimi K2.5 (Reasoning)128KListed context windows are equal.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkDeepSeek-R1Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning)Result
τ²-bench resultsSource 36.5%95.9%Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) leads
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 50.8%Not comparable
BrowseCompSource 60.6%Not comparable
APEX-Agents-AASource 11.5%Not comparable
Gert LabsSource 32.58%Not comparable
AA Agentic IndexSource 21.7%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 25.4%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 1009Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkDeepSeek-R1Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning)Result
AA-SciCodeSource 40.3%49.0%Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) leads
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 76.8%Not comparable
Vibe Code BenchSource 17.54%Not comparable
AA Coding IndexSource 46.8%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkDeepSeek-R1Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning)Result
AA-LCRSource 54.7%65.3%Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) leads
CritPtSource 1.4%3.1%Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) leads
Knowledge
BenchmarkDeepSeek-R1Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning)Result
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 20.1%35.4%Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 81.3%87.9%Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) leads
AA-HLESource 14.9%29.4%Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -27.1%-8.1%Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 31.0%34.3%Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 84.0%64.6%Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) leads
GPQASource 87.6%Not comparable
MMLU-ProSource 87.1%Not comparable
Math
BenchmarkDeepSeek-R1Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning)Result
AIME 2025Source 96.1%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkDeepSeek-R1Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning)Result
MMMU-ProSource 78.5%Not comparable
AA-MMMU-ProSource 75.4%Not comparable
Design Arena WebsiteSource 1279Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkDeepSeek-R1Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning)Result
AA-IFBenchSource 39.6%70.2%Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) leads
Frequently Asked Questions (3)

Can I compare DeepSeek-R1 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 DeepSeek-R1 and Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) today?

DeepSeek-R1: $0.55 input / $2.19 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.

Self-host vs API cost

Estimates at 50,000 req/day · 1000 tokens/req average.

DeepSeek-R1
API / mo$2,055
Self-host / mo$18,221
Break-even583M/day
Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning)
API / mo$2,700
Self-host / moNot listed
Break-even
Proprietary model — self-hosting not applicable.
Model the full break-even

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 22, 2026

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.