Skip to main content
BenchLM

Kimi K2.5 vs ZAYA1-74B-Preview

Updated September 23, 2026. We do not rank this pair: at least one has no public score. Public scores include evidence status and uncertainty.

Share or export
Share on XLinkedInSocial cardCSVJSON

Decision reading

At least one model is not scored in the current public ranking lane, so the page does not name an overall quality winner. 6 results are shared. Category rows resting on Estimated evidence or different benchmark sets are marked directional and do not name a winner.

Model A
Moonshot AI logo

Moonshot AI

53.79/100

Supported · Public rank #65

90% interval 45.662.0

Model B
Zyphra logo

Zyphra

Evidence status unavailable

90% interval unavailable

Shared results
6
Kimi K2.5 only
39
ZAYA1-74B-Preview only
1
Like-for-like categories
0 / 8
Supported: Kimi K2.5How the comparison works

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.

No workload recommendation clears the current evidence threshold.

Use the matched evidence, workload costs, and sourced specifications below instead of treating a point score as a universal answer.

Show secondary and unsupported calls
  • Coding work

    Code generation, repair, and software-engineering tasks

    Not enough matched evidence

    ZAYA1-74B-Preview is not ranked on the public lane for coding, so no winner is named for coding.

    Confidence: limited
  • Agentic work

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

    Not enough matched evidence

    ZAYA1-74B-Preview is not ranked on the public lane for agentic, so no winner is named for agentic.

    Confidence: limited
  • Long documents

    Prompts that approach the documented context limit

    No clear pick

    The documented context windows are equal.

    Confidence: documented
  • Chat turn cost

    1K fresh input + 500 output tokens

    Not enough matched evidence

    A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.

    Confidence: listed-rates
  • Cache-heavy agent loop cost

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

    Not enough matched evidence

    A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.

    Confidence: rate-fallback
  • Repository review cost

    50K fresh input + 3K output tokens

    Not enough matched evidence

    A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.

    Confidence: listed-rates

Which one for a specific job

Choose a job from the LLM Selector's task catalog to see the category row it rests on, under the same basis rules as the table below. A directional row stays directional; choosing a job never creates a winner.

The same task catalog as the LLM Selector. Each job names the evidence surface it rests on; nothing here adds a new score.

40.9Kimi K2.5ZAYA1-74B-Preview

Not comparable · BenchAlign v5.6

The coding row is not comparable on the public lane: at least one model is not measured or not ranked there.

Coding scores combine specific tasks and setups. Match the editor, harness, and effort to your workflow.

Same basis rules as the category table below

What is actually comparable

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

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.

Bars run 0–100 on each benchmark’s normalized display scale

Category results, on a stated basis

Each row shows the public-lane category score for both models: the BenchAlign v5.6 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.

Agentic

Not comparable
Kimi K2.5
35.5
Estimated · #54/105
ZAYA1-74B-Preview
Not ranked
Basis
BenchAlign v5.6 lane · 14 vs 1 public rows
Reading
Not comparable

Coding

Not comparable
Kimi K2.5
40.9
Estimated · #58/135
ZAYA1-74B-Preview
Not ranked
Basis
BenchAlign v5.6 lane · 8 vs 2 public rows
Reading
Not comparable

Reasoning

Not comparable
Kimi K2.5
54.1
Unranked · 3 rankable rows
ZAYA1-74B-Preview
Not ranked
Basis
Provisional lane · 1 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Multimodal

Not comparable
Kimi K2.5
65.8
#25/50
ZAYA1-74B-Preview
Not ranked
Basis
Provisional lane · 1 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Knowledge

Not comparable
Kimi K2.5
46.4
Estimated · #68/160
ZAYA1-74B-Preview
Not ranked
Basis
BenchAlign v5.6 lane · 6 vs 3 public rows
Reading
Not comparable

Multilingual

Not comparable
Kimi K2.5
38.2
#8/12
ZAYA1-74B-Preview
Not ranked
Basis
Provisional lane · 1 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Instruction following

Not comparable
Kimi K2.5
84.4
#41/124
ZAYA1-74B-Preview
Not ranked
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Math

Not comparable
Kimi K2.5
62.1
#4/7
ZAYA1-74B-Preview
51.6
Unranked · 1 rankable row
Basis
Provisional lane · 4 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 v5.6) differ from the provisional-lane categories. Unranked scores sit on the provisional lane’s scale but never name a winner. Like-for-like rows within 0.5 points read as a practical tie.

Bars run 0–100Methodology

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

Kimi K2.5
$0.0021
Fits in one request
ZAYA1-74B-Preview
Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
Fits in one request

ZAYA1-74B-Preview has no comparable published API token rate.

Repository review

50K fresh input + 3K output tokens

Kimi K2.5
$0.039
Fits in one request
ZAYA1-74B-Preview
Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
Fits in one request

ZAYA1-74B-Preview has no comparable published API token rate.

Cache-heavy agent loop

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

Kimi K2.5
$0.162
Fits in one request
Cached input priced at the published list-input rate
ZAYA1-74B-Preview
Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
Fits in one request
Cached-input rate unavailable

Kimi K2.5 has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate. ZAYA1-74B-Preview has no comparable published API token rate.

Cached input falls back to the list input rate only where a cached rate is unpublished

Specification differences

Sourced differences are shown directly. Missing facts stay explicit instead of being inferred from a model name or family.

Context window

Maximum documented context; output-token limits may be lower.

Kimi K2.5

256K

ZAYA1-74B-Preview

256K

API model ID

Kimi K2.5

Not sourced

ZAYA1-74B-Preview

Not sourced

Cached-input rate

A missing cached-input rate falls back to the listed input rate only in the stated workload estimate.

Kimi K2.5

Not published

ZAYA1-74B-Preview

No comparable hosted API rate

Documented inputs

Kimi K2.5

Not sourced

ZAYA1-74B-Preview

Not sourced

Documented outputs

Kimi K2.5

Not sourced

ZAYA1-74B-Preview

Not sourced

Provider availability

Kimi K2.5

Not sourced

ZAYA1-74B-Preview

Not sourced

Reasoning profile

Kimi K2.5

Non-Reasoning

ZAYA1-74B-Preview

Reasoning

Weight access

Kimi K2.5

Open Weight

ZAYA1-74B-Preview

Open Weight

License

Kimi K2.5

Open Weight

ZAYA1-74B-Preview

Open Weight

Release date

Kimi K2.5

2026-02-01

ZAYA1-74B-Preview

2026-05-07

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
At least one model is not scored in the current public ranking lane, so the page does not name an overall quality winner.
Workload cost
A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Context tradeoff
Both models list 256K.
Run the same representative tasks against both endpoints before changing production traffic.

Questions

Which is better, Kimi K2.5 or ZAYA1-74B-Preview?

At least one model is not scored in the current public ranking lane, so the page does not name an overall quality winner. The page therefore keeps the decision tied to the specific documented workload.

Which is better for coding, Kimi K2.5 or ZAYA1-74B-Preview?

ZAYA1-74B-Preview is not ranked on the public lane for coding, so no winner is named for coding.

Which is better for agentic tasks, Kimi K2.5 or ZAYA1-74B-Preview?

ZAYA1-74B-Preview is not ranked on the public lane for agentic tasks, so no winner is named for agentic tasks.

Which costs less, Kimi K2.5 or ZAYA1-74B-Preview?

Both models do not have comparable published API token rates, so this page does not name a universal price winner.

Which has the larger context window, Kimi K2.5 or ZAYA1-74B-Preview?

Both models list the same context window, 256K.

Self-host vs API cost

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

Kimi K2.5
API / mo$2,700
Self-host / mo$5,221
Break-even132M/day
ZAYA1-74B-Preview
API / mo$0
Self-host / moNot listed
Break-even
Proprietary model — self-hosting not applicable.
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 evidence46 rows

Agentic

  • Terminal-Bench 2.0

    Kimi K2.550.8%
    Source
    ZAYA1-74B-Preview

    Not directly comparable

  • BrowseComp

    Kimi K2.560.6%
    Source
    ZAYA1-74B-Preview

    Not directly comparable

  • Claw-Eval

    Kimi K2.552.3%
    Source
    ZAYA1-74B-Preview

    Not directly comparable

  • QwenClawBench

    Kimi K2.554.3%
    Source
    ZAYA1-74B-Preview

    Not directly comparable

  • τ³-bench results

    Kimi K2.565.7%
    Source
    ZAYA1-74B-Preview

    Not directly comparable

  • DeepSearchQA

    Kimi K2.577.1%
    Source
    ZAYA1-74B-Preview

    Not directly comparable

  • DeepPlanning

    Kimi K2.514.4%
    Source
    ZAYA1-74B-Preview

    Not directly comparable

  • Toolathlon

    Kimi K2.527.8%
    Source
    ZAYA1-74B-Preview

    Not directly comparable

  • MCP Atlas

    Kimi K2.529.5%
    Source
    ZAYA1-74B-Preview

    Not directly comparable

  • MCP-Tasks

    Kimi K2.559.1%
    Source
    ZAYA1-74B-Preview

    Not directly comparable

  • WideResearch

    Kimi K2.572.7%
    Source
    ZAYA1-74B-Preview

    Not directly comparable

  • Gert Labs

    Kimi K2.545.88%
    Source
    ZAYA1-74B-Preview

    Not directly comparable

  • ResearchClawBench

    Kimi K2.514.0%
    Source
    ZAYA1-74B-Preview

    Not directly comparable

  • JobBench

    Kimi K2.58.7%
    Source
    ZAYA1-74B-Preview

    Not directly comparable

  • τ²-bench Airline

    Kimi K2.5
    ZAYA1-74B-Preview56.1%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Coding

  • SWE-bench Verified

    Kimi K2.576.8%
    Source
    ZAYA1-74B-Preview53.2%
    Source

    Kimi K2.5 leads this result

  • SWE-bench Verified*

    Kimi K2.570.8%
    Source
    ZAYA1-74B-Preview

    Not directly comparable

  • LiveCodeBench v6

    Kimi K2.585.0%
    Source
    ZAYA1-74B-Preview65.7%
    Source

    Kimi K2.5 leads this result

  • SWE-bench Pro

    Kimi K2.550.7%
    Source
    ZAYA1-74B-Preview

    Not directly comparable

  • SWE Multilingual

    Kimi K2.573%
    Source
    ZAYA1-74B-Preview

    Not directly comparable

  • SWE-Rebench

    Kimi K2.558.5%
    Source
    ZAYA1-74B-Preview

    Not directly comparable

  • React Native Evals

    Kimi K2.577.2%
    Source
    ZAYA1-74B-Preview

    Not directly comparable

  • SciCode

    Kimi K2.548.7%
    Source
    ZAYA1-74B-Preview

    Not directly comparable

Reasoning

  • LongBench v2

    Kimi K2.561%
    Source
    ZAYA1-74B-Preview

    Not directly comparable

Multimodal

  • MMMU-Pro

    Kimi K2.578.5%
    Source
    ZAYA1-74B-Preview

    Not directly comparable

  • Video-MME

    Kimi K2.587.4%
    Source
    ZAYA1-74B-Preview

    Not directly comparable

  • MMVU

    Kimi K2.580.4%
    Source
    ZAYA1-74B-Preview

    Not directly comparable

  • VideoMMMU

    Kimi K2.586.6%
    Source
    ZAYA1-74B-Preview

    Not directly comparable

Knowledge

  • GPQA

    Kimi K2.587.6%
    Source
    ZAYA1-74B-Preview57.3%
    Source

    Kimi K2.5 leads this result

  • GPQA-D

    Kimi K2.587.6%
    Source
    ZAYA1-74B-Preview57.3%
    Source

    Kimi K2.5 leads this result

  • SuperGPQA

    Kimi K2.569.2%
    Source
    ZAYA1-74B-Preview

    Not directly comparable

  • MMLU-Pro

    Kimi K2.587.1%
    Source
    ZAYA1-74B-Preview68.1%
    Source

    Kimi K2.5 leads this result

  • MMLU-Pro (Arcee)

    Kimi K2.587.1%
    Source
    ZAYA1-74B-Preview

    Not directly comparable

  • HLE

    Kimi K2.530.1%
    Source
    ZAYA1-74B-Preview

    Not directly comparable

Multilingual

  • MMLU-ProX

    Kimi K2.582.3%
    Source
    ZAYA1-74B-Preview

    Not directly comparable

  • NOVA-63

    Kimi K2.556.0%
    Source
    ZAYA1-74B-Preview

    Not directly comparable

Instruction following

  • IFEval

    Kimi K2.593.9%
    Source
    ZAYA1-74B-Preview

    Not directly comparable

Math

  • AIME 2025

    Kimi K2.596.1%
    Source
    ZAYA1-74B-Preview

    Not directly comparable

  • AIME26

    Kimi K2.595.8%
    Source
    ZAYA1-74B-Preview76.4%
    Source

    Kimi K2.5 leads this result

  • AIME25 (Arcee)

    Kimi K2.596.3%
    Source
    ZAYA1-74B-Preview

    Not directly comparable

  • HMMT Feb 2025

    Kimi K2.595.4%
    Source
    ZAYA1-74B-Preview

    Not directly comparable

  • HMMT Nov 2025

    Kimi K2.591.1%
    Source
    ZAYA1-74B-Preview

    Not directly comparable

  • HMMT Feb 2026

    Kimi K2.587.1%
    Source
    ZAYA1-74B-Preview

    Not directly comparable

  • MMAnswerBench

    Kimi K2.581.8%
    Source
    ZAYA1-74B-Preview

    Not directly comparable

  • FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)

    Kimi K2.527.900%
    Source
    ZAYA1-74B-Preview

    Not directly comparable

  • FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)

    Kimi K2.54.200%
    Source
    ZAYA1-74B-Preview

    Not directly comparable

46 public results · 6 shared

Watch Kimi K2.5 vs ZAYA1-74B-Preview

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

Read a sample issue

Join 2,000+ readers.

Last updated September 23, 2026