Skip to main content
Radar

Keep up with the models you depend on. Follow price changes, retirements, and API updates.Follow the models you depend on.

Follow model changes
OpenAI logo
Model A
GPT-5.4 mini

OpenAI

61.11/100

Supported · Public rank #59

90% interval 51.071.2

GPT-5.4 mini vs Kimi K2.5

Updated September 10, 2026. Public scores include evidence status and uncertainty. They are not guarantees for a specific workload.

Moonshot AI logo
Model B
Kimi K2.5

Moonshot AI

54.01/100

Supported · Public rank #103

90% interval 46.761.3

Decision reading

GPT-5.4 mini has the higher public score estimate, 61.11 versus 54.01, but the 90% score intervals overlap. Treat that as a lead, not a settled winner.

8 results are shared. Category rows resting on Estimated evidence or different benchmark sets are marked directional and do not name a winner.

Share or export

Share on XLinkedInSocial cardCSVJSON

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

    GPT-5.4 mini

    GPT-5.4 mini has the larger documented context window.

    Confidence: documented

  • Chat turn cost

    1K fresh input + 500 output tokens

    Kimi K2.5

    Kimi K2.5 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

    GPT-5.4 mini

    GPT-5.4 mini has the lower estimated token cost for this stated workload. Kimi K2.5 has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate.

    Confidence: rate-fallback

Show secondary and unsupported calls
  • Repository review cost

    50K fresh input + 3K output tokens

    Kimi K2.5

    Kimi K2.5 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

    Kimi K2.5 is scored on Estimated evidence for coding, so the reading is directional rather than like-for-like.

    Confidence: limited

  • Agentic work

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

    Not enough matched evidence

    GPT-5.4 mini and Kimi K2.5 are scored on Estimated evidence for agentic, so the reading is directional rather than like-for-like.

    Confidence: limited

What is actually comparable

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

Shared results
8
GPT-5.4 mini only
11
Kimi K2.5 only
37
Like-for-like categories
1 / 8

4 categories rest on Estimated evidence or different evidence sets. Those rows remain visible for coverage context but do not name a winner.

Category results, on a stated basis

Each row shows the public-lane category score for both models: the BenchAlign lane for agentic, coding, 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.

Multimodal

Like-for-like
GPT-5.4 mini
57.2
#31/48
Kimi K2.5
65.7
#24/48
Basis
Provisional lane · 1 vs 1 weighted rows
Reading
Kimi K2.5 leads

Agentic

Directional only
GPT-5.4 mini
39.1
Estimated · #119/152
Kimi K2.5
46.4
Estimated · #77/152
Basis
BenchAlign lane · 6 vs 14 public rows
Reading
Directional only

Coding

Directional only
GPT-5.4 mini
42.7
Supported · #104/151
Kimi K2.5
50.6
Estimated · #55/151
Basis
BenchAlign lane · 4 vs 8 public rows
Reading
Directional only

Knowledge

Directional only
GPT-5.4 mini
55.6
Supported · #52/183
Kimi K2.5
52.0
Estimated · #69/183
Basis
BenchAlign lane · 5 vs 6 public rows
Reading
Directional only

Instruction following

Directional only
GPT-5.4 mini
89.8
#23/123
Kimi K2.5
85.8
#41/123
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Directional only

Reasoning

Not comparable
GPT-5.4 mini
73.9
Unranked · 2 rankable rows
Kimi K2.5
54.1
Unranked · 3 rankable rows
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Math

Not comparable
GPT-5.4 mini
44.5
Unranked · 2 rankable rows
Kimi K2.5
62.4
#5/7
Basis
Provisional lane · 2 vs 4 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Multilingual

Not comparable
GPT-5.4 mini
Not ranked
Kimi K2.5
38.2
#8/12
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

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

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.

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.

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

GPT-5.4 mini
$0.003
Fits in one request
Kimi K2.5
$0.0021
Fits in one request

Kimi K2.5 has the lower modeled cost

Costs use the listed standard API rates.

Repository review

50K fresh input + 3K output tokens

GPT-5.4 mini
$0.051
Fits in one request
Kimi K2.5
$0.039
Fits in one request

Kimi K2.5 has the lower modeled cost

Costs use the listed standard API rates.

Cache-heavy agent loop

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

GPT-5.4 mini
$0.075
Fits in one request
Kimi K2.5
$0.162
Fits in one request
Cached input priced at the published list-input rate

GPT-5.4 mini has the lower modeled cost

Kimi K2.5 has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate.

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.

GPT-5.4 mini

$0.075 per 1M cached input tokens

OpenAI pricing

Kimi K2.5

Not published

Provider availability

GPT-5.4 mini

Generally Available · OpenAI Responses API

OpenAI model catalog

Kimi K2.5

Not sourced

Reasoning profile

GPT-5.4 mini

Reasoning

Kimi K2.5

Non-Reasoning

Weight access

GPT-5.4 mini

Proprietary

Kimi K2.5

Open Weight

License

GPT-5.4 mini

Proprietary

Kimi K2.5

Open Weight

Release date

GPT-5.4 mini

2026-03-17

Kimi K2.5

2026-02-01

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
GPT-5.4 mini has the higher public score estimate, 61.11 versus 54.01, but the 90% score intervals overlap.
Workload cost
Repository review: $0.051 vs $0.039. Cache-heavy agent loop: $0.075 vs $0.162.
Context tradeoff
GPT-5.4 mini has the larger documented window (400K).

Run the same representative tasks against both endpoints before changing production traffic.

Self-host vs API cost

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

GPT-5.4 mini
API / mo$3,938
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

Benchmark evidence

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

Browse raw public benchmark evidence56 rows

Agentic

  • Terminal-Bench 2.0

    GPT-5.4 mini60%
    Source
    Kimi K2.550.8%
    Source

    GPT-5.4 mini leads this result

  • OSWorld-Verified

    GPT-5.4 mini72.1%
    Source
    Kimi K2.5

    Not directly comparable

  • MCP Atlas

    GPT-5.4 mini57.7%
    Source
    Kimi K2.529.5%
    Source

    GPT-5.4 mini leads this result

  • Toolathlon

    GPT-5.4 mini42.9%
    Source
    Kimi K2.527.8%
    Source

    GPT-5.4 mini leads this result

  • τ²-bench results

    GPT-5.4 mini93.4%
    Source
    Kimi K2.5

    Not directly comparable

  • Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals)

    GPT-5.4 mini54.7%
    Source
    Kimi K2.5

    Not directly comparable

  • BrowseComp

    GPT-5.4 mini
    Kimi K2.560.6%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • Claw-Eval

    GPT-5.4 mini
    Kimi K2.552.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • QwenClawBench

    GPT-5.4 mini
    Kimi K2.554.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • τ³-bench results

    GPT-5.4 mini
    Kimi K2.565.7%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • DeepSearchQA

    GPT-5.4 mini
    Kimi K2.577.1%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • DeepPlanning

    GPT-5.4 mini
    Kimi K2.514.4%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MCP-Tasks

    GPT-5.4 mini
    Kimi K2.559.1%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • WideResearch

    GPT-5.4 mini
    Kimi K2.572.7%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • Gert Labs

    GPT-5.4 mini
    Kimi K2.545.88%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • ResearchClawBench

    GPT-5.4 mini
    Kimi K2.514.0%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • JobBench

    GPT-5.4 mini
    Kimi K2.58.7%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Coding

  • Vibe Code Bench

    GPT-5.4 mini47.97%
    Source
    Kimi K2.5

    Not directly comparable

  • FrontierCode 1.1 Main

    GPT-5.4 mini27.0%
    Source
    Kimi K2.5

    Not directly comparable

  • LiveCodeBench (Vals)

    GPT-5.4 mini81.5%
    Source
    Kimi K2.5

    Not directly comparable

  • SWE-bench (Vals)

    GPT-5.4 mini73.0%
    Source
    Kimi K2.5

    Not directly comparable

  • SWE-bench Verified

    GPT-5.4 mini
    Kimi K2.576.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • SWE-bench Verified*

    GPT-5.4 mini
    Kimi K2.570.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • LiveCodeBench v6

    GPT-5.4 mini
    Kimi K2.585.0%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • SWE-bench Pro

    GPT-5.4 mini
    Kimi K2.550.7%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • SWE Multilingual

    GPT-5.4 mini
    Kimi K2.573%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • SWE-Rebench

    GPT-5.4 mini
    Kimi K2.558.5%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • React Native Evals

    GPT-5.4 mini
    Kimi K2.577.2%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • SciCode

    GPT-5.4 mini
    Kimi K2.548.7%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Reasoning

  • LongBench v2

    GPT-5.4 mini
    Kimi K2.561%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Knowledge

  • GPQA

    GPT-5.4 mini88%
    Source
    Kimi K2.587.6%
    Source

    GPT-5.4 mini leads this result

  • HLE

    GPT-5.4 mini41.5%
    Source
    Kimi K2.530.1%
    Source

    GPT-5.4 mini leads this result

  • HLE w/o tools

    GPT-5.4 mini28.2%
    Source
    Kimi K2.5

    Not directly comparable

  • GPQA Diamond (Vals)

    GPT-5.4 mini83.1%
    Source
    Kimi K2.5

    Not directly comparable

  • MMLU-Pro (Vals)

    GPT-5.4 mini84.6%
    Source
    Kimi K2.5

    Not directly comparable

  • GPQA-D

    GPT-5.4 mini
    Kimi K2.587.6%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • SuperGPQA

    GPT-5.4 mini
    Kimi K2.569.2%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MMLU-Pro

    GPT-5.4 mini
    Kimi K2.587.1%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MMLU-Pro (Arcee)

    GPT-5.4 mini
    Kimi K2.587.1%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Math

  • FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)

    Shared source
    GPT-5.4 mini28.280%
    Kimi K2.527.900%

    GPT-5.4 mini leads this result

  • FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)

    Shared source
    GPT-5.4 mini2.080%
    Kimi K2.54.200%

    Kimi K2.5 leads this result

  • AIME 2025

    GPT-5.4 mini
    Kimi K2.596.1%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • AIME26

    GPT-5.4 mini
    Kimi K2.595.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • AIME25 (Arcee)

    GPT-5.4 mini
    Kimi K2.596.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • HMMT Feb 2025

    GPT-5.4 mini
    Kimi K2.595.4%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • HMMT Nov 2025

    GPT-5.4 mini
    Kimi K2.591.1%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • HMMT Feb 2026

    GPT-5.4 mini
    Kimi K2.587.1%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MMAnswerBench

    GPT-5.4 mini
    Kimi K2.581.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Multilingual

  • MMLU-ProX

    GPT-5.4 mini
    Kimi K2.582.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • NOVA-63

    GPT-5.4 mini
    Kimi K2.556.0%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Multimodal

  • MMMU-Pro

    GPT-5.4 mini76.6%
    Source
    Kimi K2.578.5%
    Source

    Kimi K2.5 leads this result

  • MMMU-Pro w/ Python

    GPT-5.4 mini78%
    Source
    Kimi K2.5

    Not directly comparable

  • Video-MME

    GPT-5.4 mini
    Kimi K2.587.4%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MMVU

    GPT-5.4 mini
    Kimi K2.580.4%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • VideoMMMU

    GPT-5.4 mini
    Kimi K2.586.6%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Instruction following

  • IFEval

    GPT-5.4 mini
    Kimi K2.593.9%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Frequently asked questions

Which is better, GPT-5.4 mini or Kimi K2.5?

GPT-5.4 mini has the higher public score estimate, 61.11 versus 54.01, but the 90% score intervals overlap. The higher estimate is not a decisive winner because the uncertainty ranges overlap.

Which is better for coding, GPT-5.4 mini or Kimi K2.5?

Kimi K2.5 scores higher for coding on the public lane, 50.6 to 42.7. Kimi K2.5 is scored on Estimated evidence for coding, so the reading is directional rather than like-for-like. BenchLM does not name a winner for coding from a directional reading; read the shared benchmark rows directly and test the models on the same task set.

Which is better for agentic tasks, GPT-5.4 mini or Kimi K2.5?

Kimi K2.5 scores higher for agentic tasks on the public lane, 46.4 to 39.1. GPT-5.4 mini and Kimi K2.5 are scored on Estimated evidence for agentic tasks, so the reading is directional rather than like-for-like. BenchLM does not name a winner for agentic tasks from a directional reading; read the shared benchmark rows directly and test the models on the same task set.

Which costs less, GPT-5.4 mini or Kimi K2.5?

For the stated presets, chat costs $0.003 on GPT-5.4 mini and $0.0021 on Kimi K2.5; repository review costs $0.051 and $0.039; the cache-heavy agent loop costs $0.075 and $0.162. Kimi K2.5 has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate.

Which has the larger context window, GPT-5.4 mini or Kimi K2.5?

GPT-5.4 mini has the larger documented context window: 400K, compared with 256K.

Related comparisons

Last updated September 10, 2026

Watch GPT-5.4 mini vs Kimi K2.5

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

Read a sample issue

Join 2,000+ readers.