Skip to main content
BenchLM
Advertise

Model comparison

DeepSeek V4 Flash vs Kimi K2.5

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 14 shared benchmark results across 5 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

58.88/100
Margin
0.8pts
winning →
Kimi K2.5
Moonshot AI
59.66/100
1 category wins3 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: DeepSeek V4 Flash #61 (Estimated); Kimi K2.5 #54 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. DeepSeek V4 Flash and Kimi K2.5 share 14 comparable benchmark results. 4 of 8 categories are comparable. 8 results are unique to DeepSeek V4 Flash; 49 to Kimi K2.5.

Updated July 23, 2026
Shared results
14
DeepSeek V4 Flash only
8
Kimi K2.5 only
49
Comparable categories
4 / 8

Pick Kimi K2.5 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. DeepSeek V4 Flash only becomes the better choice if coding is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 14 shared benchmark results across 5 evidence categories; 4 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

Kimi K2.5 has the cleaner BenchAlign overall profile here, landing at 59.66 versus 58.88. It is a real lead, but still close enough that category-level strengths matter more than the headline number.

Kimi K2.5's sharpest advantage is in mathematics, where it averages 60.6 against 40.8. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is HMMT Feb 2026, 40.8% to 87.1%. DeepSeek V4 Flash does hit back in coding, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.

Kimi K2.5 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $0.60 input / $3.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.14 input / $0.28 output per 1M tokens for DeepSeek V4 Flash. That is roughly 10.7x on output cost alone. DeepSeek V4 Flash gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 256K for Kimi K2.5.

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 V4 Flash and Kimi K2.5
CategoryDeepSeek V4 FlashΔKimi K2.5
MathDeepSeek V4 Flash40.8Margin→ 19.8Kimi K2.560.6
KnowledgeDeepSeek V4 Flash38.8Margin→ 18.1Kimi K2.556.9
AgenticDeepSeek V4 Flash49.1Margin→ 5.9Kimi K2.555.0
CodingDeepSeek V4 Flash64.2Margin← 4.8Kimi K2.559.4
ReasoningDeepSeek V4 FlashNot measuredMarginNo overlapKimi K2.561.0
MultilingualDeepSeek V4 FlashNot measuredMarginNo overlapKimi K2.582.3
MultimodalDeepSeek V4 FlashNot measuredMarginNo overlapKimi K2.578.5
Inst. FollowingDeepSeek V4 FlashNot measuredMarginNo overlapKimi K2.593.9

Decisive benchmark drivers

The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.

More
A · DeepSeek V4 FlashB · Kimi K2.5

  1. HMMT Feb 2026

    Math
    Source ↗
    A 40.8%B 87.1%
    Winner: Kimi K2.5Δ 46.3
    HMMT Feb 2026: DeepSeek V4 Flash scored 40.8%; Kimi K2.5 scored 87.1%. Kimi K2.5 wins this benchmark.

  2. HLE

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 8.1%B 30.1%
    Winner: Kimi K2.5Δ 22
    HLE: DeepSeek V4 Flash scored 8.1%; Kimi K2.5 scored 30.1%. Kimi K2.5 wins this benchmark.

  3. GPQA

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 71.2%B 87.6%
    Winner: Kimi K2.5Δ 16.4
    GPQA: DeepSeek V4 Flash scored 71.2%; Kimi K2.5 scored 87.6%. Kimi K2.5 wins this benchmark.

  4. MMLU-Pro

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 83%B 87.1%
    Winner: Kimi K2.5Δ 4.1
    MMLU-Pro: DeepSeek V4 Flash scored 83%; Kimi K2.5 scored 87.1%. Kimi K2.5 wins this benchmark.

  5. SWE-bench Verified

    Coding
    Source ↗
    A 73.7%B 76.8%
    Winner: Kimi K2.5Δ 3.1
    SWE-bench Verified: DeepSeek V4 Flash scored 73.7%; Kimi K2.5 scored 76.8%. Kimi K2.5 wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

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

MetricDeepSeek V4 FlashKimi K2.5Comparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensDeepSeek V4 Flash$0.14 input / $0.28 outputKimi K2.5$0.6 input / $3 outputDeepSeek V4 Flash has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per secondDeepSeek V4 FlashNot availableKimi K2.545 tok/sA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenDeepSeek V4 FlashNot availableKimi K2.52.38 sA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensDeepSeek V4 Flash1MKimi K2.5256KDeepSeek V4 Flash lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

AgenticKimi K2.5 wins
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 FlashKimi K2.5Result
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 49.1%50.8%Kimi K2.5 leads
MCP AtlasSource 64%29.5%DeepSeek V4 Flash leads
ToolathlonSource 40.7%27.8%DeepSeek V4 Flash leads
Claw-EvalSource 57.8%52.3%DeepSeek V4 Flash leads
Gert LabsSource 54.35%45.88%DeepSeek V4 Flash leads
BrowseCompSource —60.6%Not comparable
QwenClawBenchSource —54.3%Not comparable
τ³-bench resultsSource —65.7%Not comparable
DeepSearchQASource —77.1%Not comparable
DeepPlanningSource —14.4%Not comparable
MCP-TasksSource —59.1%Not comparable
WideResearchSource —72.7%Not comparable
τ²-bench resultsSource —95.9%Not comparable
APEX-Agents-AASource —11.5%Not comparable
ResearchClawBenchSource —14.0%Not comparable
JobBenchSource —8.7%Not comparable
AA Agentic IndexSource —21.7%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource —25.4%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource —1009Not comparable
CodingDeepSeek V4 Flash wins
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 FlashKimi K2.5Result
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 73.7%76.8%Kimi K2.5 leads
SWE-bench ProSource 49.1%50.7%Kimi K2.5 leads
SWE MultilingualSource 69.7%73%Kimi K2.5 leads
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 49.1%—Not comparable
SWE-bench Verified*Source —70.8%Not comparable
LiveCodeBench v6Source —85.0%Not comparable
SWE-RebenchSource —58.5%Not comparable
React Native EvalsSource —77.2%Not comparable
SciCodeSource —48.7%Not comparable
AA-SciCodeSource —49.0%Not comparable
AA Coding IndexSource —46.8%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 FlashKimi K2.5Result
MRCR 1MSource 37.5%—Not comparable
CorpusQA 1MSource 15.5%—Not comparable
LongBench v2Source —61%Not comparable
AA-LCRSource —65.3%Not comparable
CritPtSource —3.1%Not comparable
KnowledgeKimi K2.5 wins
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 FlashKimi K2.5Result
MMLU-ProSource 83%87.1%Kimi K2.5 leads
SimpleQASource 23.1%—Not comparable
Chinese-SimpleQASource 71.5%—Not comparable
GPQASource 71.2%87.6%Kimi K2.5 leads
GPQA-DSource 71.2%87.6%Kimi K2.5 leads
HLESource 8.1%30.1%Kimi K2.5 leads
SuperGPQASource —69.2%Not comparable
MMLU-Pro (Arcee)Source —87.1%Not comparable
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource —35.4%Not comparable
AA-GPQA DiamondSource —87.9%Not comparable
AA-HLESource —29.4%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience IndexSource —-8.1%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource —34.3%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource —64.6%Not comparable
MathKimi K2.5 wins
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 FlashKimi K2.5Result
HMMT Feb 2026Source 40.8%87.1%Kimi K2.5 leads
IMOAnswerBenchSource 41.9%—Not comparable
ApexSource 1.0%—Not comparable
Apex ShortlistSource 9.3%—Not comparable
AIME 2025Source —96.1%Not comparable
AIME26Source —95.8%Not comparable
AIME25 (Arcee)Source —96.3%Not comparable
HMMT Feb 2025Source —95.4%Not comparable
HMMT Nov 2025Source —91.1%Not comparable
MMAnswerBenchSource —81.8%Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source —27.900%Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source —4.200%Not comparable
Multilingual
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 FlashKimi K2.5Result
MMLU-ProXSource —82.3%Not comparable
NOVA-63Source —56.0%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 FlashKimi K2.5Result
Design Arena WebsiteSource 12381279Kimi K2.5 leads
MMMU-ProSource —78.5%Not comparable
Video-MMESource —87.4%Not comparable
MMVUSource —80.4%Not comparable
VideoMMMUSource —86.6%Not comparable
AA-MMMU-ProSource —75.4%Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 FlashKimi K2.5Result
IFEvalSource —93.9%Not comparable
AA-IFBenchSource —70.2%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (5)

Which is better, DeepSeek V4 Flash or Kimi K2.5?

Kimi K2.5 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 59.66 to 58.88. The biggest single separator in this matchup is HMMT Feb 2026, where the scores are 40.8% and 87.1%.

Which is better for knowledge tasks, DeepSeek V4 Flash or Kimi K2.5?

Kimi K2.5 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 56.9 versus 38.8. Inside this category, HLE is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for coding, DeepSeek V4 Flash or Kimi K2.5?

DeepSeek V4 Flash has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 64.2 versus 59.4. Inside this category, SWE Multilingual is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for math, DeepSeek V4 Flash or Kimi K2.5?

Kimi K2.5 has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 60.6 versus 40.8. Inside this category, HMMT Feb 2026 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for agentic tasks, DeepSeek V4 Flash or Kimi K2.5?

Kimi K2.5 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 55 versus 49.1. Inside this category, MCP Atlas is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Self-host vs API cost

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

DeepSeek V4 Flash
API / mo$315
Self-host / moNot listed
Break-even—
Proprietary model — self-hosting not applicable.
Kimi K2.5
API / mo$2,700
Self-host / mo$5,221
Break-even132M/day
Model the full break-even

Related Comparisons

Explore More

DeepSeek Compare Pricing Methodology Find Your Best LLM Overall Rankings
Last updated: July 23, 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.