Model comparison
Kimi K2.7 Code vs Step 3.5 Flash
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: Kimi K2.7 Code #87 (Estimated); Step 3.5 Flash #86 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Kimi K2.7 Code and Step 3.5 Flash share 0 comparable benchmark results. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 23 results are unique to Kimi K2.7 Code; 0 to Step 3.5 Flash.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 0
- Kimi K2.7 Code only
- 23
- Step 3.5 Flash only
- 0
- Comparable categories
- 0 / 8
Benchmark data for Kimi K2.7 Code and Step 3.5 Flash is coming soon on BenchLM.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 0 shared benchmark results across 0 evidence categories; 0 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
BenchLM does not have sourced benchmark coverage for Step 3.5 Flash yet. This comparison is currently limited to metadata such as context window, reasoning mode, and pricing where available.
Kimi K2.7 Code is priced at $0.95 input / $4.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.10 input / $0.30 output per 1M tokens for Step 3.5 Flash.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Kimi K2.7 Code | Step 3.5 Flash | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Kimi K2.7 Code$0.95 input / $4 output | Step 3.5 Flash$0.1 input / $0.3 output | Step 3.5 Flash has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Kimi K2.7 CodeNot available | Step 3.5 Flash87 tok/s | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Kimi K2.7 CodeNot available | Step 3.5 Flash3.03 s | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Kimi K2.7 Code256K | Step 3.5 Flash256K | Listed context windows are equal. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic7 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.7 Code | Step 3.5 Flash | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Kimi Claw 24/7Source | 46.9% | — | Not comparable |
| MCP AtlasSource | 76% | — | Not comparable |
| MCP Mark VerifiedSource | 81.1% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 29.6% | — | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 90.1% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 34.3% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 1187 | — | Not comparable |
Coding6 benchmarks
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge6 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.7 Code | Step 3.5 Flash | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 42.0% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 89.6% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | 32.8% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -10.7% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 38.6% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 80.3% | — | Not comparable |
Multimodal1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.7 Code | Step 3.5 Flash | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | 1302 | — | Not comparable |
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.7 Code | Step 3.5 Flash | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 63.1% | — | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Can I compare Kimi K2.7 Code and Step 3.5 Flash on BenchLM yet?
Not fully yet. BenchLM is tracking both models, but the sourced benchmark breakdown for this comparison is still coming soon.
Why does this comparison show “coming soon”?
BenchLM only shows category winners and benchmark-level calls when we have sourced results that can be compared fairly. For these models, the public benchmark coverage is not complete enough yet.
What data is available for Kimi K2.7 Code and Step 3.5 Flash today?
Kimi K2.7 Code: $0.95 input / $4.00 output per 1M tokens Step 3.5 Flash: $0.10 input / $0.30 output per 1M tokens Both model pages still include creator, context window, reasoning mode, and other metadata while benchmark coverage fills in.
Self-host vs API cost
Estimates at 50,000 req/day · 1000 tokens/req average.
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.