Skip to main content
BenchLM
Advertise

Model comparison

Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite vs Kimi K2.5

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 16 shared benchmark results across 5 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

N/A
No comparison
Kimi K2.5
Moonshot AI
59.66/100
2 category wins1 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite unranked (Not scored); Kimi K2.5 #54 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite and Kimi K2.5 share 16 comparable benchmark results. 3 of 8 categories are comparable. 5 results are unique to Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite; 47 to Kimi K2.5.

Updated July 21, 2026
Shared results
16
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite only
5
Kimi K2.5 only
47
Comparable categories
3 / 8

Treat this as a split decision. Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite makes more sense if reasoning is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill; Kimi K2.5 is the better fit if coding is the priority or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 16 shared benchmark results across 5 evidence categories; 3 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 K2.5 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 K2.5 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $0.60 input / $3.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.30 input / $2.50 output per 1M tokens for Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite. Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite is the reasoning model in the pair, while Kimi K2.5 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. Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite 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 Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite and Kimi K2.5
CategoryGemini 3.5 Flash-LiteΔKimi K2.5
ReasoningGemini 3.5 Flash-Lite72.2Margin← 11.2Kimi K2.561.0
AgenticGemini 3.5 Flash-Lite63.4Margin← 8.4Kimi K2.555.0
CodingGemini 3.5 Flash-Lite54.2Margin→ 5.2Kimi K2.559.4
KnowledgeGemini 3.5 Flash-LiteNot measuredMarginNo overlapKimi K2.556.9
MathGemini 3.5 Flash-LiteNot measuredMarginNo overlapKimi K2.560.6
MultilingualGemini 3.5 Flash-LiteNot measuredMarginNo overlapKimi K2.582.3
MultimodalGemini 3.5 Flash-LiteNot measuredMarginNo overlapKimi K2.578.5
Inst. FollowingGemini 3.5 Flash-LiteNot measuredMarginNo overlapKimi K2.593.9

Decisive benchmark drivers

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

More
A · Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteB · Kimi K2.5

  1. SWE-bench Pro

    Coding
    Source ↗
    A 54.2%B 50.7%
    Winner: Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteΔ 3.5
    SWE-bench Pro: Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite scored 54.2%; Kimi K2.5 scored 50.7%. Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite wins this benchmark.

  2. Terminal-Bench 2.0

    Agentic
    Source ↗
    A 54%B 50.8%
    Winner: Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteΔ 3.2
    Terminal-Bench 2.0: Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite scored 54%; Kimi K2.5 scored 50.8%. Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

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

MetricGemini 3.5 Flash-LiteKimi K2.5Comparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensGemini 3.5 Flash-Lite$0.3 input / $2.5 outputKimi K2.5$0.6 input / $3 outputGemini 3.5 Flash-Lite has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per secondGemini 3.5 Flash-LiteNot availableKimi K2.545 tok/sA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenGemini 3.5 Flash-LiteNot availableKimi K2.52.38 sA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensGemini 3.5 Flash-Lite1MKimi K2.5256KGemini 3.5 Flash-Lite lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

AgenticGemini 3.5 Flash-Lite wins
BenchmarkGemini 3.5 Flash-LiteKimi K2.5Result
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 54%50.8%Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads
OSWorld-VerifiedSource 74%—Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 11401009Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads
AA Agentic IndexSource 26.8%21.7%Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads
GDPval-AASource 32.0%25.4%Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads
AA BriefcaseSource 634—Not comparable
AA Tau3 BankingSource 16.5%—Not comparable
BrowseCompSource —60.6%Not comparable
Claw-EvalSource —52.3%Not comparable
QwenClawBenchSource —54.3%Not comparable
τ³-bench resultsSource —65.7%Not comparable
DeepSearchQASource —77.1%Not comparable
DeepPlanningSource —14.4%Not comparable
ToolathlonSource —27.8%Not comparable
MCP AtlasSource —29.5%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
Gert LabsSource —45.88%Not comparable
ResearchClawBenchSource —14.0%Not comparable
JobBenchSource —8.7%Not comparable
CodingKimi K2.5 wins
BenchmarkGemini 3.5 Flash-LiteKimi K2.5Result
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 54.0%—Not comparable
SWE-bench ProSource 54.2%50.7%Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads
AA Coding IndexSource 49.3%46.8%Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads
AA-SciCodeSource 40.9%49.0%Kimi K2.5 leads
SWE-bench VerifiedSource —76.8%Not comparable
SWE-bench Verified*Source —70.8%Not comparable
LiveCodeBench v6Source —85.0%Not comparable
SWE MultilingualSource —73%Not comparable
SWE-RebenchSource —58.5%Not comparable
React Native EvalsSource —77.2%Not comparable
SciCodeSource —48.7%Not comparable
ReasoningGemini 3.5 Flash-Lite wins
BenchmarkGemini 3.5 Flash-LiteKimi K2.5Result
MRCRv2Source 72.2%—Not comparable
AA-LCRSource 62.0%65.3%Kimi K2.5 leads
CritPtSource 0.0%3.1%Kimi K2.5 leads
LongBench v2Source —61%Not comparable
Knowledge
BenchmarkGemini 3.5 Flash-LiteKimi K2.5Result
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 36.5%35.4%Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 83.8%87.9%Kimi K2.5 leads
AA-HLESource 17.5%29.4%Kimi K2.5 leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource 6.9%-8.1%Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 30.3%34.3%Kimi K2.5 leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 33.5%64.6%Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads
GPQASource —87.6%Not comparable
GPQA-DSource —87.6%Not comparable
SuperGPQASource —69.2%Not comparable
MMLU-ProSource —87.1%Not comparable
MMLU-Pro (Arcee)Source —87.1%Not comparable
HLESource —30.1%Not comparable
Math
BenchmarkGemini 3.5 Flash-LiteKimi K2.5Result
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
HMMT Feb 2026Source —87.1%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
BenchmarkGemini 3.5 Flash-LiteKimi K2.5Result
MMLU-ProXSource —82.3%Not comparable
NOVA-63Source —56.0%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkGemini 3.5 Flash-LiteKimi K2.5Result
AA-MMMU-ProSource 79.0%75.4%Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads
MMMU-ProSource —78.5%Not comparable
Video-MMESource —87.4%Not comparable
MMVUSource —80.4%Not comparable
VideoMMMUSource —86.6%Not comparable
Design Arena WebsiteSource —1279Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkGemini 3.5 Flash-LiteKimi K2.5Result
IFEvalSource —93.9%Not comparable
AA-IFBenchSource —70.2%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (4)

Which is better, Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite or Kimi K2.5?

Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite and Kimi K2.5 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 coding, Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite or Kimi K2.5?

Kimi K2.5 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 59.4 versus 54.2. Inside this category, AA-SciCode is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for reasoning, Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite or Kimi K2.5?

Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite has the edge for reasoning in this comparison, averaging 72.2 versus 61. Inside this category, AA-LCR is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for agentic tasks, Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite or Kimi K2.5?

Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 63.4 versus 55. Inside this category, GDPval-AA 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.

Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite
API / mo$2,100
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

Google Compare Pricing Methodology Find Your Best LLM Overall Rankings
Last updated: July 21, 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.