Skip to main content
BenchLM
Data

Gemini 4 Hydrogen vs Kimi K3

Updated November 12, 2026. We do not rank this pair: at least one has no public score. Public scores include evidence status and uncertainty.

Share or export
Share on XLinkedInAPI/MCP

Decision reading

At least one model is not scored in the current public ranking lane, so the page does not name an overall quality winner. 1 results are shared. Category rows resting on Estimated evidence or different benchmark sets are marked directional and do not name a winner.

Model A
Google logo

Google

—

Evidence status unavailable

90% interval unavailable

Model B
Moonshot AI logo

Moonshot AI

68.66/100

Supported · Public rank #17

90% interval 64.3–73.0

API price per 1M tokens

Gemini 4 Hydrogen: $1.50 input / $7.50 output

Kimi K3: $3 input / $15 output

Context window

Gemini 4 Hydrogen: 1M

Kimi K3: 1.05M

Released

Gemini 4 Hydrogen: November 12, 2026

Kimi K3: July 16, 2026

Shared results
1
Gemini 4 Hydrogen only
4
Kimi K3 only
58
Like-for-like categories
0 / 8
Supported: Kimi K3How the comparison works

Which one for your work

Recommendations appear only when a shared evidence basis or an explicit operating constraint supports the call. Secondary and unsupported use cases stay disclosed below the initial list.

  • Long documents

    Prompts that approach the documented context limit

    Kimi K3

    Kimi K3 has the larger documented context window.

    Confidence: documented
  • Chat turn cost

    1K fresh input + 500 output tokens

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen has the lower estimated token cost for this stated workload. Costs use the listed standard API rates.

    Confidence: listed-rates
  • Cache-heavy agent loop cost

    200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen has the lower estimated token cost for this stated workload. Costs use the listed standard API rates.

    Confidence: listed-rates
Show secondary and unsupported calls
  • Repository review cost

    50K fresh input + 3K output tokens

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen has the lower estimated token cost for this stated workload. Costs use the listed standard API rates.

    Confidence: listed-rates
  • Coding work

    Code generation, repair, and software-engineering tasks

    Not enough matched evidence

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen is not ranked on the public lane for coding, so no winner is named for coding.

    Confidence: limited
  • Agentic work

    Tool use, computer use, and multi-step task completion

    Not enough matched evidence

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen is not ranked on the public lane for agentic, so no winner is named for agentic.

    Confidence: limited

Which one for a specific job

Choose a job from the LLM Selector's task catalog to see the category row it rests on, under the same basis rules as the table below. A directional row stays directional; choosing a job never creates a winner.

The same task catalog as the LLM Selector. Each job names the evidence surface it rests on; nothing here adds a new score.

—Gemini 4 Hydrogen56.2Kimi K3

Not comparable · BenchAlign v5.8

The coding row is not comparable on the public lane: at least one model is not measured or not ranked there.

Coding scores combine specific tasks and setups. Match the editor, harness, and effort to your workflow.

Same basis rules as the category table below

Or describe your own job

The LLM Selector reads what you need a model for and returns a shortlist, ranked in the same order the job pages publish.

Describe the task and constraints. This selector recommends models; it cannot carry out the task or access your files and accounts.

We keep what you type here, drafts included, for 180 days, and after that only the job and requirements read from it. Nothing is tied to your IP address or account. Leave out names and other personal details. Privacy

What is actually comparable

Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results present for only one model describe coverage, not superiority.

Shape of the matched evidence

Only shared public evidence is shown. Sparse evidence stays a ruled list rather than being closed into a radar shape.

A shared-evidence shape is not available.

BenchLM does not draw a radar or infer missing axes when the matched evidence is too sparse.

Category results, on a stated basis

Each row shows the public-lane category score for both models: the BenchAlign v5.8 lane for agentic, coding, reasoning, multimodal, and knowledge, and the weighted public rows elsewhere, with the same rank each model page reports. A row is like-for-like only when both scores rest on Supported evidence or the same weighted set. Directional and not-comparable rows remain visible, but they never receive a winner.

Agentic

Not comparable
Gemini 4 Hydrogen
Not ranked
Kimi K3
65.7
Supported · #18/135
Basis
BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 3 vs 18 public rows
Reading
Not comparable

Coding

Not comparable
Gemini 4 Hydrogen
Not ranked
Kimi K3
56.2
Supported · #24/161
Basis
BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 1 vs 18 public rows
Reading
Not comparable

Reasoning

Not comparable
Gemini 4 Hydrogen
Not ranked
Kimi K3
65.5
Supported · #21/160
Basis
BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 0 vs 2 public rows
Reading
Not comparable

Multimodal

Not comparable
Gemini 4 Hydrogen
Not ranked
Kimi K3
67.7
Estimated · #17/67
Basis
BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 1 vs 14 public rows
Reading
Not comparable

Knowledge

Not comparable
Gemini 4 Hydrogen
Not ranked
Kimi K3
67.7
Supported · #20/180
Basis
BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 0 vs 6 public rows
Reading
Not comparable

Multilingual

Not comparable
Gemini 4 Hydrogen
Not ranked
Kimi K3
Not ranked
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Instruction following

Not comparable
Gemini 4 Hydrogen
Not ranked
Kimi K3
Not ranked
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Math

Not comparable
Gemini 4 Hydrogen
Not ranked
Kimi K3
Not ranked
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Ranks count the models scored in each category’s lane, so the agentic, coding, reasoning, multimodal, and knowledge denominators (BenchAlign v5.8) differ from the provisional-lane categories. Unranked scores sit on the provisional lane’s scale but never name a winner. Like-for-like rows within 0.5 points read as a practical tie.

Supported evidence per lane · bars run 0–100Methodology

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes turn per-token rates into comparable decisions. Each scenario states context fit and whether cached input had to fall back to the published list-input rate.

Chat turn

1K fresh input + 500 output tokens

Gemini 4 Hydrogen
$0.00525
Fits in one request
Kimi K3
$0.0105
Fits in one request

Gemini 4 Hydrogen has the lower modeled cost

Costs use the listed standard API rates.

Repository review

50K fresh input + 3K output tokens

Gemini 4 Hydrogen
$0.0975
Fits in one request
Kimi K3
$0.195
Fits in one request

Gemini 4 Hydrogen has the lower modeled cost

Costs use the listed standard API rates.

Cache-heavy agent loop

200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens

Gemini 4 Hydrogen
$0.12
Fits in one request
Kimi K3
$0.27
Fits in one request

Gemini 4 Hydrogen has the lower modeled cost

Costs use the listed standard API rates.

Your workload

Enter a month of tokens to price it at both models’ listed API rates.

Gemini 4 Hydrogen
$30.00
per month
Kimi K3
$60.00
per month

Standard listed rates, no batch or volume discounts.

Cached input falls back to the list input rate only where a cached rate is unpublished

Specification differences

Sourced differences are shown directly. Missing facts stay explicit instead of being inferred from a model name or family.

Cached-input rate

A missing cached-input rate falls back to the listed input rate only in the stated workload estimate.

Gemini 4 Hydrogen

$0.075 per 1M cached input tokens

Google Gemini API pricing

Kimi K3

$0.3 per 1M cached input tokens

Reasoning profile

Gemini 4 Hydrogen

Reasoning

Kimi K3

Reasoning

Weight access

Gemini 4 Hydrogen

Proprietary

Kimi K3

Open Weight

License

Gemini 4 Hydrogen

Proprietary

Kimi K3

Open Weight

Release date

Gemini 4 Hydrogen

2026-11-12

Kimi K3

2026-07-16

If you already use one of these models

Deployment change
The models list different providers, so authentication, endpoint behavior, limits, and feature support may change.
Quality signal
At least one model is not scored in the current public ranking lane, so the page does not name an overall quality winner.
Workload cost
Repository review: $0.0975 vs $0.195. Cache-heavy agent loop: $0.12 vs $0.27.
Context tradeoff
Kimi K3 has the larger documented window (1.05M).
Run the same representative tasks against both endpoints before changing production traffic.

Questions

Which is better, Gemini 4 Hydrogen or Kimi K3?

At least one model is not scored in the current public ranking lane, so the page does not name an overall quality winner. The page therefore keeps the decision tied to the specific documented workload.

Which is better for coding, Gemini 4 Hydrogen or Kimi K3?

Gemini 4 Hydrogen is not ranked on the public lane for coding, so no winner is named for coding.

Which is better for agentic tasks, Gemini 4 Hydrogen or Kimi K3?

Gemini 4 Hydrogen is not ranked on the public lane for agentic tasks, so no winner is named for agentic tasks.

Which costs less, Gemini 4 Hydrogen or Kimi K3?

For the stated presets, chat costs $0.00525 on Gemini 4 Hydrogen and $0.0105 on Kimi K3; repository review costs $0.0975 and $0.195; the cache-heavy agent loop costs $0.12 and $0.27. Costs use the listed standard API rates.

Which has the larger context window, Gemini 4 Hydrogen or Kimi K3?

Kimi K3 has the larger documented context window: 1.05M, compared with 1M.

Self-host vs API cost

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

Gemini 4 Hydrogen
API / mo$6,750
Self-host / moNot listed
Break-even—
Proprietary model — self-hosting not applicable.
Kimi K3
API / mo$13,500
Self-host / mo$57,606
Break-evenNot reached at 70% load
Model the full break-even

Benchmark evidence

The full public result ledger is available for audit without forcing a wide desktop table onto a phone.

Browse raw public benchmark evidence63 rows

Agentic

  • OSWorld 2.1 Offline

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen77.6%
    Source
    Kimi K3—

    Not directly comparable

  • MKA

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen53.4%
    Source
    Kimi K3—

    Not directly comparable

  • Terminal-Bench-Science 0.1

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen51.4%
    Source
    Kimi K3—

    Not directly comparable

  • Finch

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen—
    Kimi K377.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • b3 Agent Security

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen—
    Kimi K388.0%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • Cyber Misuse Refusal

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen—
    Kimi K394.0%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • Terminal-Bench 2.1

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen—
    Kimi K388.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • BrowseComp

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen—
    Kimi K391.2%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • DeepSearchQA

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen—
    Kimi K395.0%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • Toolathlon-Verified

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen—
    Kimi K373.2%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MCP Atlas

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen—
    Kimi K384.2%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • AutomationBench

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen—
    Kimi K330.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • JobBench

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen—
    Kimi K352.9%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • APEX-Agents

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen—
    Kimi K337.6%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • SpreadsheetBench 2

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen—
    Kimi K334.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • DECK-Bench

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen—
    Kimi K373.5%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals)

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen—
    Kimi K380.9%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • ApprenticeBench

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen—
    Kimi K318%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • Hermes Index

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen—
    Kimi K339.2%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • Hermes Bench

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen—
    Kimi K371.5%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MazeBench

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen—
    Kimi K31%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Coding

  • FrontierCode 2.0

    Shared source
    Gemini 4 Hydrogen38.2%
    Kimi K317.7%

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen leads this result

  • ScarfBench

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen—
    Kimi K361.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • DeepSWE

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen—
    Kimi K367.5%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • CursorBench 3.2

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen—
    Kimi K360.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • FrontierSWE

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen—
    Kimi K381.2%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • ProgramBench

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen—
    Kimi K377.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • Kimi Code Bench v2

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen—
    Kimi K372.9%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • sweMarathon

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen—
    Kimi K342%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • PostTrainBench (lab runs)

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen—
    Kimi K336.6%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MLS-Bench Lite

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen—
    Kimi K348.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • VulcanBench v3

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen—
    Kimi K373.7%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • OpenHarmony Bench

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen—
    Kimi K357.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • FrontierSWE v2

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen—
    Kimi K325.9%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • LiveCodeBench (Vals)

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen—
    Kimi K387.2%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • SWE-bench (Vals)

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen—
    Kimi K393.4%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • PostTrainBench v1.1

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen—
    Kimi K332.0%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • Bug Hunt Bench

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen—
    Kimi K321.0 fixes
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • PostTrainBench

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen—
    Kimi K331.5%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Reasoning

  • ARC-AGI-1

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen—
    Kimi K394.50%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • ARC-AGI-2

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen—
    Kimi K360.4%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Multimodal

  • Chartography (no tools)

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen66.6%
    Source
    Kimi K3—

    Not directly comparable

  • ExtractBench (LlamaIndex)

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen—
    Kimi K383.17%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • OfficeQA Pro

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen—
    Kimi K363.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MMMU-Pro

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen—
    Kimi K381.6%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MMMU-Pro w/ Python

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen—
    Kimi K383.4%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • CharXiv w/o tools

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen—
    Kimi K384.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • CharXiv

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen—
    Kimi K391.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MathVision

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen—
    Kimi K394.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MathVision w/ Python

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen—
    Kimi K397.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • BabyVision w/ Python

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen—
    Kimi K385.7%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • ZeroBench

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen—
    Kimi K323.0%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • ZeroBench w/ Python

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen—
    Kimi K341.0%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • WorldVQA ForceAnswer

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen—
    Kimi K351.0%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • OmniDocBench

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen—
    Kimi K391.1%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • PerceptionBench

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen—
    Kimi K358.5%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Knowledge

  • GPQA

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen—
    Kimi K393.5%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • GPQA-D

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen—
    Kimi K393.5%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • HLE

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen—
    Kimi K356%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • HLE w/o tools

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen—
    Kimi K343.5%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • GPQA Diamond (Vals)

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen—
    Kimi K392.9%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MMLU-Pro (Vals)

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen—
    Kimi K388.0%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Instruction following

  • Gray Swan IPI (15 attempts)

    Gemini 4 Hydrogen—
    Kimi K352.7%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

63 public results · 1 shared

Watch Gemini 4 Hydrogen vs Kimi K3

One weekly email when material rank, price, or benchmark evidence changes make this matchup worth revisiting.

Read a sample issue

Join 7,000+ subscribers.

Last updated November 12, 2026