Model Comparison

Kimi K2.5 vs Claude Opus 4.7

Claude Opus 4.7 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Kimi K2.5 is 9.3x cheaper per token.

Want to compare interactively?Try the playground

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

8 benchmarks

Kimi K2.5 outperforms in 0 benchmarks, while Claude Opus 4.7 is better at 8 benchmarks (BrowseComp, CharXiv-R, CyberGym, GPQA, Humanity's Last Exam, SWE-Bench Pro, SWE-Bench Verified, Terminal-Bench 2.0).

Claude Opus 4.7 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Thu Apr 16 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Kimi K2.5 costs less

For input processing, Kimi K2.5 ($0.60/1M tokens) is 8.3x cheaper than Claude Opus 4.7 ($5.00/1M tokens).

For output processing, Kimi K2.5 ($2.50/1M tokens) is 10.0x cheaper than Claude Opus 4.7 ($25.00/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Claude Opus 4.7 is more expensive than Kimi K2.5.*

* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens

Lowest available price from all providers
Thu Apr 16 2026 • llm-stats.com
Moonshot AI
Kimi K2.5
Input tokens$0.60
Output tokens$2.50
Best providerFireworks
Anthropic
Claude Opus 4.7
Input tokens$5.00
Output tokens$25.00
Best providerAnthropic
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Claude Opus 4.7 accepts 1,000,000 input tokens compared to Kimi K2.5's 262,100 tokens. Kimi K2.5 can generate longer responses up to 262,100 tokens, while Claude Opus 4.7 is limited to 128,000 tokens.

Moonshot AI
Kimi K2.5
Input262,100 tokens
Output262,100 tokens
Anthropic
Claude Opus 4.7
Input1,000,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Thu Apr 16 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

Both Kimi K2.5 and Claude Opus 4.7 support multimodal inputs.

They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.

Kimi K2.5

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Claude Opus 4.7

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Kimi K2.5 is licensed under MIT, while Claude Opus 4.7 uses a proprietary license.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

Kimi K2.5

MIT

Open weights

Claude Opus 4.7

Proprietary

Closed source

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Kimi K2.5 was released on 2026-01-27, while Claude Opus 4.7 was released on 2026-04-16.

Claude Opus 4.7 is 3 months newer than Kimi K2.5.

Kimi K2.5

Jan 27, 2026

2 months ago

Claude Opus 4.7

Apr 16, 2026

0 days ago

2mo newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.

Unable to compare the recency of their training data.

No cutoff dates available

Provider Availability

Kimi K2.5 is available from Fireworks. Claude Opus 4.7 is available from Anthropic.

Kimi K2.5

fireworks logo
Fireworks
Input Price:Input: $0.60/1MOutput Price:Output: $2.50/1M

Claude Opus 4.7

anthropic logo
Anthropic
Input Price:Input: $5.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $25.00/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Key Takeaways

Moonshot AI
Less expensive input tokens
Less expensive output tokens
Has open weights
Anthropic
Larger context window (1,000,000 tokens)
Higher BrowseComp score (79.3% vs 74.9%)
Higher CharXiv-R score (91.0% vs 77.5%)
Higher CyberGym score (73.1% vs 41.3%)
Higher GPQA score (94.2% vs 87.6%)
Higher Humanity's Last Exam score (54.7% vs 50.2%)
Higher SWE-Bench Pro score (64.3% vs 50.7%)
Higher SWE-Bench Verified score (87.6% vs 76.8%)
Higher Terminal-Bench 2.0 score (69.4% vs 50.8%)

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
Moonshot AI
Kimi K2.5
Anthropic
Claude Opus 4.7

FAQ

Common questions about Kimi K2.5 vs Claude Opus 4.7

Claude Opus 4.7 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Kimi K2.5 is made by Moonshot AI and Claude Opus 4.7 is made by Anthropic. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their benchmark scores, pricing, and capabilities above.
Kimi K2.5 scores AIME 2025: 96.1%, HMMT 2025: 95.4%, InfoVQAtest: 92.6%, OCRBench: 92.3%, MathVista-Mini: 90.1%. Claude Opus 4.7 scores GPQA: 94.2%, MMMLU: 91.5%, CharXiv-R: 91.0%, SWE-Bench Verified: 87.6%, BrowseComp: 79.3%.
Kimi K2.5 is 8.3x cheaper for input tokens. Kimi K2.5 costs $0.60/M input and $2.50/M output via fireworks. Claude Opus 4.7 costs $5.00/M input and $25.00/M output via anthropic.
Kimi K2.5 supports 262K tokens and Claude Opus 4.7 supports 1.0M tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.
Key differences include context window (262K vs 1.0M), input pricing ($0.60 vs $5.00/M), licensing (MIT vs Proprietary). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.
Kimi K2.5 is developed by Moonshot AI and Claude Opus 4.7 is developed by Anthropic.