Model comparison
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite vs Kimi K3
Head-to-head evidence from 17 shared benchmark results across 5 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite unranked (Not scored); Kimi K3 #4 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite and Kimi K3 share 17 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 4 results are unique to Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite; 40 to Kimi K3.
Updated July 21, 2026- Shared results
- 17
- Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite only
- 4
- Kimi K3 only
- 40
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Treat this as a split decision. Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite makes more sense if you want the cheaper token bill; Kimi K3 is the better fit if agentic is the priority or you need the larger 1.05M context window.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 17 shared benchmark results across 5 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
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite and Kimi K3 finish on the same BenchAlign overall score, so this is less about a single winner and more about where the edge shows up. The BenchAlign headline says tie; the benchmark table is where the real choice happens.
Kimi K3 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $3.00 input / $15.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.30 input / $2.50 output per 1M tokens for Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite. That is roughly 6.0x on output cost alone. Kimi K3 gives you the larger context window at 1.05M, compared with 1M for Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite.
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 | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite | Δ | Kimi K3 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agentic | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite63.4 | Margin→ 26.1 | Kimi K389.5 |
| Coding | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite54.2 | MarginNo overlap | Kimi K3Not measured |
| Reasoning | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite72.2 | MarginNo overlap | Kimi K3Not measured |
| Knowledge | Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Kimi K361.0 |
| Multimodal | Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Kimi K378.5 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
Terminal-Bench 2.0
AgenticA 54%B 88.3%Winner: Kimi K3Δ 34.3Terminal-Bench 2.0: Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite scored 54%; Kimi K3 scored 88.3%. Kimi K3 wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite | Kimi K3 | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite$0.3 input / $2.5 output | Kimi K3$3 input / $15 output | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteNot available | Kimi K3Not available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteNot available | Kimi K3Not available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite1M | Kimi K31.05M | Kimi K3 lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticKimi K3 wins22 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite | Kimi K3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 54% | 88.3% | Kimi K3 leads |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | 74% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 1140 | 1679 | Kimi K3 leads |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 26.8% | 50.1% | Kimi K3 leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 32.0% | 59.0% | Kimi K3 leads |
| AA BriefcaseSource | 634 | 1543 | Kimi K3 leads |
| AA Tau3 BankingSource | 16.5% | 33.4% | Kimi K3 leads |
| BrowseCompSource | — | 91.2% | Not comparable |
| DeepSearchQASource | — | 95.0% | Not comparable |
| Toolathlon-VerifiedSource | — | 73.2% | Not comparable |
| MCP AtlasSource | — | 84.2% | Not comparable |
| AutomationBenchSource | — | 30.8% | Not comparable |
| JobBenchSource | — | 52.9% | Not comparable |
| APEX-AgentsSource | — | 37.6% | Not comparable |
| SpreadsheetBench 2Source | — | 34.8% | Not comparable |
| DECK-BenchSource | — | 73.5% | Not comparable |
| AA AutomationBenchSource | — | 52.7% | Not comparable |
| AA EnterpriseOps-GymSource | — | 45.3% | Not comparable |
| AA Harvey LABSource | — | 94.6% | Not comparable |
| aaTerminalBench21Source | — | 85% | Not comparable |
| APEX-Agents-AASource | — | 41.3% | Not comparable |
| AA ITBenchSource | — | 47.7% | Not comparable |
Coding11 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite | Kimi K3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 54.0% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench ProSource | 54.2% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | 49.3% | 76.2% | Kimi K3 leads |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 40.9% | 58.7% | Kimi K3 leads |
| deepSweSource | — | 67.5% | Not comparable |
| FrontierSWESource | — | 81.2% | Not comparable |
| ProgramBenchSource | — | 77.8% | Not comparable |
| Kimi Code Bench v2Source | — | 72.9% | Not comparable |
| sweMarathonSource | — | 42% | Not comparable |
| PostTrain BenchSource | — | 36.6% | Not comparable |
| MLS-Bench LiteSource | — | 48.3% | Not comparable |
Reasoning3 benchmarks
Knowledge10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite | Kimi K3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 36.5% | 57.1% | Kimi K3 leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 83.8% | 93.5% | Kimi K3 leads |
| AA-HLESource | 17.5% | 44.3% | Kimi K3 leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | 6.9% | 18.4% | Kimi K3 leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 30.3% | 46.0% | Kimi K3 leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 33.5% | 50.9% | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads |
| GPQASource | — | 93.5% | Not comparable |
| GPQA-DSource | — | 93.5% | Not comparable |
| HLESource | — | 56% | Not comparable |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | — | 43.5% | Not comparable |
Multimodal15 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite | Kimi K3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-MMMU-ProSource | 79.0% | 80.5% | Kimi K3 leads |
| OfficeQA ProSource | — | 63.3% | Not comparable |
| MMMU-ProSource | — | 81.6% | Not comparable |
| MMMU-Pro w/ PythonSource | — | 83.4% | Not comparable |
| CharXiv w/o toolsSource | — | 84.8% | Not comparable |
| CharXivSource | — | 91.3% | Not comparable |
| MathVisionSource | — | 94.3% | Not comparable |
| MathVision w/ PythonSource | — | 97.8% | Not comparable |
| BabyVision w/ PythonSource | — | 85.7% | Not comparable |
| ZeroBenchSource | — | 23.0% | Not comparable |
| ZeroBench w/ PythonSource | — | 41.0% | Not comparable |
| WorldVQA ForceAnswerSource | — | 51.0% | Not comparable |
| OmniDocBenchSource | — | 91.1% | Not comparable |
| PerceptionBenchSource | — | 58.5% | Not comparable |
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | — | 1386 | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite or Kimi K3?
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite and Kimi K3 are tied on the BenchAlign overall score, so the right pick depends on which category matters most for your use case.
Which is better for agentic tasks, Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite or Kimi K3?
Kimi K3 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 89.5 versus 63.4. Inside this category, AA Briefcase is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
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.