Model comparison
Gemini 3 Pro vs Kimi K2
Head-to-head evidence from 13 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Gemini 3 Pro #19 (Supported); Kimi K2 #189 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Gemini 3 Pro and Kimi K2 share 13 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 14 results are unique to Gemini 3 Pro; 1 to Kimi K2.
Updated July 20, 2026- Shared results
- 13
- Gemini 3 Pro only
- 14
- Kimi K2 only
- 1
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Pick Gemini 3 Pro if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Kimi K2 only becomes the better choice if you want the cheaper token bill.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 13 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
Gemini 3 Pro is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 67.73 to 27.19. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Gemini 3 Pro's sharpest advantage is in mathematics, where it averages 32.9 against 16.1. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4), 18.750% to 0.000%.
Gemini 3 Pro is also the more expensive model on tokens at $2.00 input / $12.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.60 input / $2.50 output per 1M tokens for Kimi K2. That is roughly 4.8x on output cost alone. Gemini 3 Pro gives you the larger context window at 2M, 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 | Gemini 3 Pro | Δ | Kimi K2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Math | Gemini 3 Pro32.9 | Margin← 16.8 | Kimi K216.1 |
| Reasoning | Gemini 3 Pro31.1 | MarginNo overlap | Kimi K2Not measured |
| Multimodal | Gemini 3 Pro81.1 | MarginNo overlap | Kimi K2Not measured |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)
MathA 18.750%B 0.000%Winner: Gemini 3 ProΔ 18.8FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4): Gemini 3 Pro scored 18.750%; Kimi K2 scored 0.000%. Gemini 3 Pro wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)
MathA 37.600%B 21.404%Winner: Gemini 3 ProΔ 16.2FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3): Gemini 3 Pro scored 37.600%; Kimi K2 scored 21.404%. Gemini 3 Pro wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Gemini 3 Pro | Kimi K2 | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Gemini 3 Pro$2 input / $12 output | Kimi K2$0.6 input / $2.5 output | Kimi K2 has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Gemini 3 Pro109 tok/s | Kimi K243 tok/s | Gemini 3 Pro has the higher measured throughput. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Gemini 3 Pro32.65 s | Kimi K21.51 s | Kimi K2 reaches the first token sooner. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Gemini 3 Pro2M | Kimi K2128K | Gemini 3 Pro lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic3 benchmarks
Coding3 benchmarks
Reasoning3 benchmarks
Knowledge7 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 3 Pro | Kimi K2 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 39.5% | 19.4% | Gemini 3 Pro leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 90.8% | 76.6% | Gemini 3 Pro leads |
| AA-HLESource | 37.2% | 7.0% | Gemini 3 Pro leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | 15.8% | -27.5% | Gemini 3 Pro leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 55.9% | 26.8% | Gemini 3 Pro leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 90.9% | 74.2% | Kimi K2 leads |
| AA MMLU-ProSource | 89.8% | — | Not comparable |
MathGemini 3 Pro wins2 benchmarks
Multilingual1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 3 Pro | Kimi K2 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Global-MMLU-LiteSource | 92.2% | — | Not comparable |
Multimodal8 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 3 Pro | Kimi K2 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMMU-ProSource | 81% | — | Not comparable |
| MathVisionSource | 86.6% | — | Not comparable |
| VideoMMMUSource | 87.6% | — | Not comparable |
| ScreenSpot ProSource | 72.7% | — | Not comparable |
| CharXivSource | 81.4% | — | Not comparable |
| V*Source | 88.0% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-MMMU-ProSource | 80.2% | — | Not comparable |
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | — | 1083 | Not comparable |
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 3 Pro | Kimi K2 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 70.4% | 41.5% | Gemini 3 Pro leads |
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, Gemini 3 Pro or Kimi K2?
Gemini 3 Pro is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 67.73 to 27.19. The biggest single separator in this matchup is FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4), where the scores are 18.750% and 0.000%.
Which is better for math, Gemini 3 Pro or Kimi K2?
Gemini 3 Pro has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 32.9 versus 16.1. Inside this category, FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4) 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.