Math
Like-for-like- GPT-5.4 mini
- 21.7
- Kimi K2
- 16.1
- Weighted basis
- 2 vs 2 rows
- Reading
- GPT-5.4 mini leads
Model comparison
Updated July 30, 2026. Public scores include evidence status and uncertainty. They are not guarantees for a specific workload.
GPT-5.4 mini has the higher public score, 55.79 versus 26.35, and the 90% score intervals do not overlap.
2 results are shared. Category rows based on different benchmark sets are marked directional and do not name a winner.
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.
Prompts that approach the documented context limit
GPT-5.4 mini
GPT-5.4 mini has the larger documented context window.
Confidence: documented
1K fresh input + 500 output tokens
Kimi K2
Kimi K2 has the lower estimated token cost for this stated workload. Costs use the listed standard API rates.
Confidence: listed-rates
50K fresh input + 3K output tokens
Kimi K2
Kimi K2 has the lower estimated token cost for this stated workload. Costs use the listed standard API rates.
Confidence: listed-rates
Code generation, repair, and software-engineering tasks
Not enough matched evidence
No shared weighted benchmark basis supports a winner.
Confidence: limited
Tool use, computer use, and multi-step task completion
Not enough matched evidence
No shared weighted benchmark basis supports a winner.
Confidence: limited
200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens
Not enough matched evidence
The page does not recommend a cost winner because at least one model cannot fit the stated workload in one request. Kimi K2 does not fit this workload in one request. Kimi K2 has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate.
Confidence: rate-fallback
Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results present for only one model describe coverage, not superiority.
Each row states whether both averages use the same weighted benchmark set. Directional and not-comparable rows remain visible, but they never receive a winner in this template.
| Category | GPT-5.4 mini | Kimi K2 | Weighted basis | Reading |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Math | 21.7 | 16.1 | Like-for-like2 vs 2 rows | GPT-5.4 mini leads |
| Agentic | 65.7 | Not measured | Not comparable2 vs 0 rows | Not comparable |
| Coding | Not measured | Not measured | Not comparable0 vs 0 rows | Not comparable |
| Reasoning | Not measured | Not measured | Not comparable0 vs 0 rows | Not comparable |
| Knowledge | 47.8 | Not measured | Not comparable2 vs 0 rows | Not comparable |
| Multilingual | Not measured | Not measured | Not comparable0 vs 0 rows | Not comparable |
| Multimodal | 76.6 | Not measured | Not comparable1 vs 0 rows | Not comparable |
| Instruction following | Not measured | Not measured | Not comparable0 vs 0 rows | Not comparable |
Only shared public evidence is shown. Sparse evidence stays a ruled list rather than being closed into a radar shape.
Too few matched category axes support a radar. The ruled list below shows only shared benchmark results; positions use each benchmark’s normalized display scale when available.
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)
Math
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)
Math
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.
1K fresh input + 500 output tokens
Kimi K2 has the lower modeled cost
Costs use the listed standard API rates.
50K fresh input + 3K output tokens
Kimi K2 has the lower modeled cost
Costs use the listed standard API rates.
200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens
Kimi K2 does not fit this workload in one request. Kimi K2 has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate.
Sourced differences are shown directly. Missing facts stay explicit instead of being inferred from a model name or family.
Maximum documented context; output-token limits may be lower.
GPT-5.4 mini
Kimi K2
128K
GPT-5.4 mini
gpt-5.4-mini
OpenAI GPT-5.4 mini model documentationKimi K2
Not sourced
A missing cached-input rate falls back to the listed input rate only in the stated workload estimate.
GPT-5.4 mini
$0.075 per 1M cached input tokens
OpenAI pricingKimi K2
Not published
GPT-5.4 mini
text, image
OpenAI model catalogKimi K2
Not sourced
GPT-5.4 mini
Kimi K2
Not sourced
GPT-5.4 mini
Generally Available · OpenAI Responses API
OpenAI model catalogKimi K2
Not sourced
GPT-5.4 mini
Reasoning
Kimi K2
Non-Reasoning
GPT-5.4 mini
Proprietary
Kimi K2
Proprietary
GPT-5.4 mini
Proprietary
Kimi K2
Proprietary
GPT-5.4 mini
2026-03-17
Kimi K2
2025-07-01
Run the same representative tasks against both endpoints before changing production traffic.
The full public result ledger is available for audit without forcing a wide desktop table onto a phone.
Terminal-Bench 2.0
Not directly comparable
OSWorld-Verified
Not directly comparable
MCP Atlas
Not directly comparable
Toolathlon
Not directly comparable
τ²-bench results
Not directly comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)
Shared sourceGPT-5.4 mini leads this result
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)
Shared sourceGPT-5.4 mini leads this result
GPT-5.4 mini has the higher public score, 55.79 versus 26.35, and the 90% score intervals do not overlap. That is the clearest overall quality signal in the current public data.
The published evidence does not provide a shared weighted coding basis for both models, so BenchLM does not name a coding winner.
The published evidence does not provide a shared weighted agentic tasks basis for both models, so BenchLM does not name a agentic tasks winner.
For the stated presets, chat costs $0.003 on GPT-5.4 mini and $0.00185 on Kimi K2; repository review costs $0.051 and $0.0375; the cache-heavy agent loop costs $0.075 and $0.157. Kimi K2 does not fit this workload in one request. Kimi K2 has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate.
GPT-5.4 mini has the larger documented context window: 400K, compared with 128K.
Last updated July 30, 2026
One weekly email when material rank, price, or benchmark evidence changes make this matchup worth revisiting.
Read a sample issueJoin 2,000+ readers.