Model comparison
GPT-4.1 mini vs Kimi K2
Head-to-head evidence from 13 shared benchmark results across 7 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: GPT-4.1 mini #160 (Estimated); Kimi K2 #199 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. GPT-4.1 mini and Kimi K2 share 13 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 9 results are unique to GPT-4.1 mini; 1 to Kimi K2.
Updated July 24, 2026- Shared results
- 13
- GPT-4.1 mini only
- 9
- Kimi K2 only
- 1
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Pick GPT-4.1 mini if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Kimi K2 only becomes the better choice if mathematics is the priority.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 13 shared benchmark results across 7 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
GPT-4.1 mini is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 43.1 to 26.36. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Kimi K2 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $0.60 input / $2.50 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.40 input / $1.60 output per 1M tokens for GPT-4.1 mini. GPT-4.1 mini 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 | GPT-4.1 mini | Δ | Kimi K2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Math | GPT-4.1 mini4.5 | Margin→ 11.6 | Kimi K216.1 |
| Coding | GPT-4.1 mini23.6 | MarginNo overlap | Kimi K2Not measured |
| Knowledge | GPT-4.1 mini64.2 | MarginNo overlap | Kimi K2Not measured |
| Inst. Following | GPT-4.1 mini88.5 | MarginNo overlap | Kimi K2Not measured |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)
MathA 4.483%B 21.404%Winner: Kimi K2Δ 16.9FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3): GPT-4.1 mini scored 4.483%; Kimi K2 scored 21.404%. Kimi K2 wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | GPT-4.1 mini | Kimi K2 | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | GPT-4.1 mini$0.4 input / $1.6 output | Kimi K2$0.6 input / $2.5 output | GPT-4.1 mini has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | GPT-4.1 mini80 tok/s | Kimi K243 tok/s | GPT-4.1 mini has the higher measured throughput. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | GPT-4.1 mini0.76 s | Kimi K21.51 s | GPT-4.1 mini reaches the first token sooner. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | GPT-4.1 mini1M | Kimi K2128K | GPT-4.1 mini lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic4 benchmarks
Coding3 benchmarks
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge8 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 mini | Kimi K2 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLUSource | 87.5% | — | Not comparable |
| GPQASource | 64.2% | — | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 14.8% | 19.4% | Kimi K2 leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 66.4% | 76.6% | Kimi K2 leads |
| AA-HLESource | 4.6% | 7.0% | Kimi K2 leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -50.1% | -27.5% | Kimi K2 leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 17.5% | 26.8% | Kimi K2 leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 82.0% | 74.2% | Kimi K2 leads |
MathKimi K2 wins2 benchmarks
Multimodal2 benchmarks
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, GPT-4.1 mini or Kimi K2?
GPT-4.1 mini is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 43.1 to 26.36. The biggest single separator in this matchup is FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3), where the scores are 4.483% and 21.404%.
Which is better for math, GPT-4.1 mini or Kimi K2?
Kimi K2 has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 16.1 versus 4.5. Inside this category, FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3) is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.