Head-to-head comparison across 1benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
Grok Code Fast 1
40
Kimi K2.5
64
Verified leaderboard positions: Grok Code Fast 1 unranked · Kimi K2.5 #11
Pick Kimi K2.5 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Grok Code Fast 1 only becomes the better choice if coding is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.
Coding
+6.6 difference
Grok Code Fast 1
Kimi K2.5
$0.2 / $1.5
$0.6 / $3
172 t/s
45 t/s
2.81s
2.38s
256K
256K
Pick Kimi K2.5 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Grok Code Fast 1 only becomes the better choice if coding is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.
Kimi K2.5 is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 64 to 40. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Kimi K2.5 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $0.60 input / $3.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.20 input / $1.50 output per 1M tokens for Grok Code Fast 1. That is roughly 2.0x on output cost alone.
Kimi K2.5 is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 64 to 40. The biggest single separator in this matchup is SWE-bench Verified, where the scores are 70.8% and 76.8%.
Grok Code Fast 1 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 70.8 versus 64.2. Inside this category, SWE-bench Verified is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Estimates at 50,000 req/day · 1000 tokens/req average.
For engineers, researchers, and the plain curious — a weekly brief on new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.