Skip to main content

Model comparison

DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) vs Kimi K2

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 12 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

55.47/100
Margin
28.3pts
← winning
Moonshot AI
27.19/100
1 category wins0 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) #81 (Estimated); Kimi K2 #189 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) and Kimi K2 share 12 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 26 results are unique to DeepSeek V4 Pro (High); 2 to Kimi K2.

Updated July 23, 2026
Shared results
12
DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) only
26
Kimi K2 only
2
Comparable categories
1 / 8

Pick DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Kimi K2 only becomes the better choice if you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 12 shared benchmark results across 6 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

DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 55.47 to 27.19. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.

DeepSeek V4 Pro (High)'s sharpest advantage is in mathematics, where it averages 94 against 16.1.

Kimi K2 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $0.60 input / $2.50 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.43 input / $0.87 output per 1M tokens for DeepSeek V4 Pro (High). That is roughly 2.9x on output cost alone. DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) is the reasoning model in the pair, while Kimi K2 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. DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 128K for Kimi K2.

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 Pro (High) and Kimi K2
CategoryDeepSeek V4 Pro (High)ΔKimi K2
MathDeepSeek V4 Pro (High)94.0Margin 77.9Kimi K216.1
AgenticDeepSeek V4 Pro (High)70.6MarginNo overlapKimi K2Not measured
CodingDeepSeek V4 Pro (High)69.8MarginNo overlapKimi K2Not measured
KnowledgeDeepSeek V4 Pro (High)57.0MarginNo overlapKimi K2Not measured

Operational comparison

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

MetricDeepSeek V4 Pro (High)Kimi K2Comparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensDeepSeek V4 Pro (High)$0.435 input / $0.87 outputKimi K2$0.6 input / $2.5 outputDeepSeek V4 Pro (High) has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per secondDeepSeek V4 Pro (High)Not availableKimi K243 tok/sA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenDeepSeek V4 Pro (High)Not availableKimi K21.51 sA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensDeepSeek V4 Pro (High)1MKimi K2128KDeepSeek V4 Pro (High) lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Pro (High)Kimi K2Result
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 63.3%Not comparable
BrowseCompSource 80.4%Not comparable
HLE w/ toolsSource 44.7%Not comparable
MCP AtlasSource 74.2%Not comparable
ToolathlonSource 49%Not comparable
τ²-bench resultsSource 94.2%61.1%DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) leads
GDPval-AASource 39.9%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 1299Not comparable
AA Agentic IndexSource 34.4%Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Pro (High)Kimi K2Result
CodeforcesSource 2919.0Not comparable
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 79.4%Not comparable
SWE-bench ProSource 54.4%Not comparable
SWE MultilingualSource 74.1%Not comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 63.3%Not comparable
AA-SciCodeSource 46.4%34.5%DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) leads
AA Coding IndexSource 58.7%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Pro (High)Kimi K2Result
MRCR 1MSource 83.3%Not comparable
CorpusQA 1MSource 56.5%Not comparable
AA-LCRSource 65.0%51.0%DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) leads
CritPtSource 10.0%0.0%DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) leads
Knowledge
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Pro (High)Kimi K2Result
MMLU-ProSource 87.1%Not comparable
SimpleQASource 46.2%Not comparable
Chinese-SimpleQASource 77.7%Not comparable
GPQASource 89.1%Not comparable
GPQA-DSource 89.1%Not comparable
HLESource 34.5%Not comparable
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 43.1%19.4%DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 90.5%76.6%DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) leads
AA-HLESource 33.5%7.0%DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -9.7%-27.5%DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 41.8%26.8%DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 88.6%74.2%Kimi K2 leads
MathDeepSeek V4 Pro (High) wins
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Pro (High)Kimi K2Result
HMMT Feb 2026Source 94.0%Not comparable
IMOAnswerBenchSource 88.0%Not comparable
ApexSource 27.4%Not comparable
Apex ShortlistSource 85.5%Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 21.404%Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source 0.000%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Pro (High)Kimi K2Result
Design Arena WebsiteSource 12641080DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) leads
Inst. Following
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Pro (High)Kimi K2Result
AA-IFBenchSource 71.3%41.5%DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) leads
Frequently Asked Questions (2)

Which is better, DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) or Kimi K2?

DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 55.47 to 27.19.

Which is better for math, DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) or Kimi K2?

DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 94 versus 16.1. Kimi K2 stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.

Related Comparisons

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.