Model comparison
DeepSeek V4 Pro Base vs Kimi K3
Head-to-head evidence from 0 shared benchmark results across 0 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: DeepSeek V4 Pro Base unranked (Not scored); Kimi K3 #4 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. DeepSeek V4 Pro Base and Kimi K3 share 0 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 24 results are unique to DeepSeek V4 Pro Base; 57 to Kimi K3.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 0
- DeepSeek V4 Pro Base only
- 24
- Kimi K3 only
- 57
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Treat this as a split decision. DeepSeek V4 Pro Base makes more sense if knowledge is the priority or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model; Kimi K3 is the better fit if you need the larger 1.05M context window or you want the stronger reasoning-first profile.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 0 shared benchmark results across 0 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
DeepSeek V4 Pro Base and Kimi K3 finish on the same BenchAlign overall score, so this is less about a single winner and more about where the edge shows up. The BenchAlign headline says tie; the benchmark table is where the real choice happens.
Kimi K3 is the reasoning model in the pair, while DeepSeek V4 Pro Base is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. Kimi K3 gives you the larger context window at 1.05M, compared with 1M for DeepSeek V4 Pro Base.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | DeepSeek V4 Pro Base | Kimi K3 | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | DeepSeek V4 Pro BaseNot available | Kimi K3$3 input / $15 output | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | DeepSeek V4 Pro BaseNot available | Kimi K3Not available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | DeepSeek V4 Pro BaseNot available | Kimi K3Not available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | DeepSeek V4 Pro Base1M | Kimi K31.05M | Kimi K3 lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic21 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro Base | Kimi K3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 88.3% | Not comparable |
| BrowseCompSource | — | 91.2% | Not comparable |
| DeepSearchQASource | — | 95.0% | Not comparable |
| Toolathlon-VerifiedSource | — | 73.2% | Not comparable |
| MCP AtlasSource | — | 84.2% | Not comparable |
| AutomationBenchSource | — | 30.8% | Not comparable |
| JobBenchSource | — | 52.9% | Not comparable |
| APEX-AgentsSource | — | 37.6% | Not comparable |
| SpreadsheetBench 2Source | — | 34.8% | Not comparable |
| DECK-BenchSource | — | 73.5% | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | — | 50.1% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 59.0% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 1679 | Not comparable |
| AA BriefcaseSource | — | 1543 | Not comparable |
| AA AutomationBenchSource | — | 52.7% | Not comparable |
| AA EnterpriseOps-GymSource | — | 45.3% | Not comparable |
| AA Harvey LABSource | — | 94.6% | Not comparable |
| AA Tau3 BankingSource | — | 33.4% | Not comparable |
| aaTerminalBench21Source | — | 85% | Not comparable |
| APEX-Agents-AASource | — | 41.3% | Not comparable |
| AA ITBenchSource | — | 47.7% | Not comparable |
Coding11 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro Base | Kimi K3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBenchSource | 59.2% | — | Not comparable |
| HumanEvalSource | 76.8% | — | Not comparable |
| deepSweSource | — | 67.5% | Not comparable |
| FrontierSWESource | — | 81.2% | Not comparable |
| ProgramBenchSource | — | 77.8% | Not comparable |
| Kimi Code Bench v2Source | — | 72.9% | Not comparable |
| sweMarathonSource | — | 42% | Not comparable |
| PostTrain BenchSource | — | 36.6% | Not comparable |
| MLS-Bench LiteSource | — | 48.3% | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | — | 76.2% | Not comparable |
| AA-SciCodeSource | — | 58.7% | Not comparable |
Reasoning8 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro Base | Kimi K3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| BBHSource | 87.5% | — | Not comparable |
| DROPSource | 88.7% | — | Not comparable |
| HellaSwagSource | 88.0% | — | Not comparable |
| WinoGrandeSource | 81.5% | — | Not comparable |
| CLUEWSCSource | 85.2% | — | Not comparable |
| LongBench v2Source | 51.5% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-LCRSource | — | 74.7% | Not comparable |
| CritPtSource | — | 23.4% | Not comparable |
KnowledgeDeepSeek V4 Pro Base wins22 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro Base | Kimi K3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AGIEvalSource | 83.1% | — | Not comparable |
| MMLUSource | 90.1% | — | Not comparable |
| MMLU-ReduxSource | 90.8% | — | Not comparable |
| MMLU-ProSource | 73.5% | — | Not comparable |
| MMMLUSource | 90.3% | — | Not comparable |
| C-EvalSource | 93.1% | — | Not comparable |
| CMMLUSource | 90.8% | — | Not comparable |
| MultiLoKoSource | 51.1% | — | Not comparable |
| SimpleQASource | 55.2% | — | Not comparable |
| SuperGPQASource | 53.9% | — | Not comparable |
| FACTS ParametricSource | 62.6% | — | Not comparable |
| TriviaQASource | 85.6% | — | Not comparable |
| GPQASource | — | 93.5% | Not comparable |
| GPQA-DSource | — | 93.5% | Not comparable |
| HLESource | — | 56% | Not comparable |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | — | 43.5% | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | — | 57.1% | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | — | 93.5% | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | — | 44.3% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | — | 18.4% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | — | 46.0% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | — | 50.9% | Not comparable |
Math3 benchmarks
Multilingual1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro Base | Kimi K3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MGSMSource | 84.4% | — | Not comparable |
Multimodal15 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro Base | Kimi K3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| OfficeQA ProSource | — | 63.3% | Not comparable |
| MMMU-ProSource | — | 81.6% | Not comparable |
| MMMU-Pro w/ PythonSource | — | 83.4% | Not comparable |
| CharXiv w/o toolsSource | — | 84.8% | Not comparable |
| CharXivSource | — | 91.3% | Not comparable |
| MathVisionSource | — | 94.3% | Not comparable |
| MathVision w/ PythonSource | — | 97.8% | Not comparable |
| BabyVision w/ PythonSource | — | 85.7% | Not comparable |
| ZeroBenchSource | — | 23.0% | Not comparable |
| ZeroBench w/ PythonSource | — | 41.0% | Not comparable |
| WorldVQA ForceAnswerSource | — | 51.0% | Not comparable |
| OmniDocBenchSource | — | 91.1% | Not comparable |
| PerceptionBenchSource | — | 58.5% | Not comparable |
| AA-MMMU-ProSource | — | 80.5% | Not comparable |
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | — | 1386 | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, DeepSeek V4 Pro Base or Kimi K3?
DeepSeek V4 Pro Base and Kimi K3 are tied on the BenchAlign overall score, so the right pick depends on which category matters most for your use case.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, DeepSeek V4 Pro Base or Kimi K3?
DeepSeek V4 Pro Base has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 66.4 versus 61. Kimi K3 stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
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.