Skip to main content
BenchLM
Advertise

Model comparison

Grok 4 vs Kimi K2.5

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 16 shared benchmark results across 7 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

60.42/100
Margin
0.8pts
← winning
Kimi K2.5
Moonshot AI
59.66/100
0 category wins1 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Grok 4 #50 (Supported); Kimi K2.5 #54 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Grok 4 and Kimi K2.5 share 16 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 0 results are unique to Grok 4; 47 to Kimi K2.5.

Updated July 22, 2026
Shared results
16
Grok 4 only
0
Kimi K2.5 only
47
Comparable categories
1 / 8

Pick Grok 4 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Kimi K2.5 only becomes the better choice if mathematics is the priority or you need the larger 256K context window.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 16 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

Grok 4 has the cleaner BenchAlign overall profile here, landing at 60.42 versus 59.66. It is a real lead, but still close enough that category-level strengths matter more than the headline number.

Kimi K2.5 gives you the larger context window at 256K, compared with 128K for Grok 4.

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 scores and score margins for Grok 4 and Kimi K2.5
CategoryGrok 4ΔKimi K2.5
MathGrok 415.3Margin→ 45.3Kimi K2.560.6
AgenticGrok 4Not measuredMarginNo overlapKimi K2.555.0
CodingGrok 4Not measuredMarginNo overlapKimi K2.559.4
ReasoningGrok 4Not measuredMarginNo overlapKimi K2.561.0
KnowledgeGrok 4Not measuredMarginNo overlapKimi K2.556.9
MultilingualGrok 4Not measuredMarginNo overlapKimi K2.582.3
MultimodalGrok 4Not measuredMarginNo overlapKimi K2.578.5
Inst. FollowingGrok 4Not measuredMarginNo overlapKimi K2.593.9

Decisive benchmark drivers

The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.

More
A · Grok 4B · Kimi K2.5

  1. FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)

    Math
    Source ↗
    A 19.655%B 27.900%
    Winner: Kimi K2.5Δ 8.2
    FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3): Grok 4 scored 19.655%; Kimi K2.5 scored 27.900%. Kimi K2.5 wins this benchmark.

  2. FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)

    Math
    Source ↗
    A 2.083%B 4.200%
    Winner: Kimi K2.5Δ 2.1
    FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4): Grok 4 scored 2.083%; Kimi K2.5 scored 4.200%. Kimi K2.5 wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

MetricGrok 4Kimi K2.5Comparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensGrok 4Not availableKimi K2.5$0.6 input / $3 outputA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondGrok 454 tok/sKimi K2.545 tok/sGrok 4 has the higher measured throughput.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenGrok 415.60 sKimi K2.52.38 sKimi K2.5 reaches the first token sooner.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensGrok 4128KKimi K2.5256KKimi K2.5 lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkGrok 4Kimi K2.5Result
τ²-bench resultsSource 74.9%95.9%Kimi K2.5 leads
Gert LabsSource 42.34%45.88%Kimi K2.5 leads
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source —50.8%Not comparable
BrowseCompSource —60.6%Not comparable
Claw-EvalSource —52.3%Not comparable
QwenClawBenchSource —54.3%Not comparable
τ³-bench resultsSource —65.7%Not comparable
DeepSearchQASource —77.1%Not comparable
DeepPlanningSource —14.4%Not comparable
ToolathlonSource —27.8%Not comparable
MCP AtlasSource —29.5%Not comparable
MCP-TasksSource —59.1%Not comparable
WideResearchSource —72.7%Not comparable
APEX-Agents-AASource —11.5%Not comparable
ResearchClawBenchSource —14.0%Not comparable
JobBenchSource —8.7%Not comparable
AA Agentic IndexSource —21.7%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource —25.4%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource —1009Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkGrok 4Kimi K2.5Result
React Native EvalsSource 72.6%77.2%Kimi K2.5 leads
AA-SciCodeSource 45.7%49.0%Kimi K2.5 leads
SWE-bench VerifiedSource —76.8%Not comparable
SWE-bench Verified*Source —70.8%Not comparable
LiveCodeBench v6Source —85.0%Not comparable
SWE-bench ProSource —50.7%Not comparable
SWE MultilingualSource —73%Not comparable
SWE-RebenchSource —58.5%Not comparable
SciCodeSource —48.7%Not comparable
AA Coding IndexSource —46.8%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkGrok 4Kimi K2.5Result
AA-LCRSource 68.0%65.3%Grok 4 leads
CritPtSource 2.0%3.1%Kimi K2.5 leads
LongBench v2Source —61%Not comparable
Knowledge
BenchmarkGrok 4Kimi K2.5Result
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 33.3%35.4%Kimi K2.5 leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 87.7%87.9%Kimi K2.5 leads
AA-HLESource 23.9%29.4%Kimi K2.5 leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource 3.8%-8.1%Grok 4 leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 41.4%34.3%Grok 4 leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 64.2%64.6%Grok 4 leads
GPQASource —87.6%Not comparable
GPQA-DSource —87.6%Not comparable
SuperGPQASource —69.2%Not comparable
MMLU-ProSource —87.1%Not comparable
MMLU-Pro (Arcee)Source —87.1%Not comparable
HLESource —30.1%Not comparable
MathKimi K2.5 wins
BenchmarkGrok 4Kimi K2.5Result
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 19.655%27.900%Kimi K2.5 leads
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source 2.083%4.200%Kimi K2.5 leads
AIME 2025Source —96.1%Not comparable
AIME26Source —95.8%Not comparable
AIME25 (Arcee)Source —96.3%Not comparable
HMMT Feb 2025Source —95.4%Not comparable
HMMT Nov 2025Source —91.1%Not comparable
HMMT Feb 2026Source —87.1%Not comparable
MMAnswerBenchSource —81.8%Not comparable
Multilingual
BenchmarkGrok 4Kimi K2.5Result
MMLU-ProXSource —82.3%Not comparable
NOVA-63Source —56.0%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkGrok 4Kimi K2.5Result
AA-MMMU-ProSource 68.8%75.4%Kimi K2.5 leads
MMMU-ProSource —78.5%Not comparable
Video-MMESource —87.4%Not comparable
MMVUSource —80.4%Not comparable
VideoMMMUSource —86.6%Not comparable
Design Arena WebsiteSource —1279Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkGrok 4Kimi K2.5Result
AA-IFBenchSource 53.7%70.2%Kimi K2.5 leads
IFEvalSource —93.9%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (2)

Which is better, Grok 4 or Kimi K2.5?

Grok 4 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 60.42 to 59.66. The biggest single separator in this matchup is FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3), where the scores are 19.655% and 27.900%.

Which is better for math, Grok 4 or Kimi K2.5?

Kimi K2.5 has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 60.6 versus 15.3. Inside this category, FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3) is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Self-host vs API cost

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

Grok 4
API / mo$0
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

Related Comparisons

Explore More

xAI Compare Pricing Methodology Find Your Best LLM Overall Rankings
Last updated: July 22, 2026

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.