Model comparison
Kimi K3 vs MiMo-V2-Flash
Head-to-head evidence from 14 shared benchmark results across 4 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Kimi K3 #4 (Supported); MiMo-V2-Flash #91 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Kimi K3 and MiMo-V2-Flash share 14 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 43 results are unique to Kimi K3; 5 to MiMo-V2-Flash.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 14
- Kimi K3 only
- 43
- MiMo-V2-Flash only
- 5
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Pick Kimi K3 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. MiMo-V2-Flash only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 14 shared benchmark results across 4 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
Kimi K3 is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 80.96 to 54.06. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Kimi K3 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $3.00 input / $15.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for MiMo-V2-Flash. That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone. Kimi K3 gives you the larger context window at 1.05M, compared with 256K for MiMo-V2-Flash.
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 | Kimi K3 | Δ | MiMo-V2-Flash |
|---|---|---|---|
| Knowledge | Kimi K361.0 | Margin→ 23.7 | MiMo-V2-Flash84.7 |
| Agentic | Kimi K389.5 | MarginNo overlap | MiMo-V2-FlashNot measured |
| Coding | Kimi K3Not measured | MarginNo overlap | MiMo-V2-Flash73.4 |
| Multimodal | Kimi K378.5 | MarginNo overlap | MiMo-V2-FlashNot measured |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
GPQA
KnowledgeA 93.5%B 83.7%Winner: Kimi K3Δ 9.8GPQA: Kimi K3 scored 93.5%; MiMo-V2-Flash scored 83.7%. Kimi K3 wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Kimi K3 | MiMo-V2-Flash | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Kimi K3$3 input / $15 output | MiMo-V2-Flash$0 input / $0 output | MiMo-V2-Flash has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Kimi K3Not available | MiMo-V2-Flash129 tok/s | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Kimi K3Not available | MiMo-V2-Flash2.14 s | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Kimi K31.05M | MiMo-V2-Flash256K | Kimi K3 lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic22 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Kimi K3 | MiMo-V2-Flash | 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% | 12.0% | Kimi K3 leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 59.0% | 16.7% | Kimi K3 leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 1679 | 833 | Kimi K3 leads |
| 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 |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | — | 83.9% | Not comparable |
Coding10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Kimi K3 | MiMo-V2-Flash | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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% | 49.8% | Kimi K3 leads |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 58.7% | 25.9% | Kimi K3 leads |
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | — | 73.4% | Not comparable |
Reasoning2 benchmarks
KnowledgeMiMo-V2-Flash wins11 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Kimi K3 | MiMo-V2-Flash | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 93.5% | 83.7% | Kimi K3 leads |
| GPQA-DSource | 93.5% | — | Not comparable |
| HLESource | 56% | — | Not comparable |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | 43.5% | — | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 57.1% | 24.7% | Kimi K3 leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 93.5% | 65.6% | Kimi K3 leads |
| AA-HLESource | 44.3% | 8.0% | Kimi K3 leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | 18.4% | -48.5% | Kimi K3 leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 46.0% | 15.2% | Kimi K3 leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 50.9% | 75.1% | Kimi K3 leads |
| MMLU-ProSource | — | 84.9% | Not comparable |
Math1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Kimi K3 | MiMo-V2-Flash | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AIME 2025Source | — | 94.1% | Not comparable |
Multimodal15 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Kimi K3 | MiMo-V2-Flash | 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 |
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Kimi K3 | MiMo-V2-Flash | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | — | 39.9% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, Kimi K3 or MiMo-V2-Flash?
Kimi K3 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 80.96 to 54.06. The biggest single separator in this matchup is GPQA, where the scores are 93.5% and 83.7%.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, Kimi K3 or MiMo-V2-Flash?
MiMo-V2-Flash has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 84.7 versus 61. Inside this category, AA-Omniscience Index is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Related Comparisons
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.