Command A vs Kimi K2 Thinking
Updated October 21, 2026. 22 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.
Decision reading
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Command A has the edge where what matters is LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) or SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI), where it leads.
- Shared results
- 22
- Command A only
- 38
- Kimi K2 Thinking only
- 8
- Like-for-like categories
- 7 of 9
Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results only one model has describe coverage, not superiority.
Which one for your work
Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Neither has a coding score yet.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
Kimi K2 Thinking
Kimi K2 Thinking leads, 22.0 against 13.1.
Same board, both measured
Agentic work
AA Agentic Index
No call
Only Command A has a AA Agentic Index result, 1.0.
Directional only
Reasoning
GPQA Diamond
Kimi K2 Thinking
Kimi K2 Thinking leads, 78.5% against 48.5%.
Same board, both measured
Math
AIME
Kimi K2 Thinking
Kimi K2 Thinking leads, 85.4% against 13.3%.
Same board, both measured
Knowledge
MMLU Pro
Kimi K2 Thinking
Kimi K2 Thinking leads, 81.1% against 69.2%.
Same board, both measured
Web design
Design Arena: websites
No call
Only Kimi K2 Thinking has a Design Arena: websites result, 1113.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
Kimi K2 Thinking
Kimi K2 Thinking takes 262K tokens against 256K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Kimi K2 Thinking
Command A $0.0075, Kimi K2 Thinking $0.0019 per turn.
List prices
Cost per solved task
One SWE-bench Verified task, solved
Kimi K2 Thinking
Command A $2.69, Kimi K2 Thinking $0.61.
Published attempt cost and pass rate
At a glance
- Coding index
- Command A not benchmarked, Kimi K2 Thinking not benchmarked.
- Widest category
- Math, 60.0 points apart on average over 4 shared benchmarks.
- Widest single gap
- AA Math Index: Command A 13.0 against Kimi K2 Thinking 94.7, 81.7 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Command A $10.00 against Kimi K2 Thinking $2.50 per million output tokens, 4.0x apart.
- Context window
- Command A takes 256K tokens, Kimi K2 Thinking 262K.
Benchmark by benchmark
First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.
| Category | Command A | Bars | Kimi K2 Thinking | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 0 | 4 | ||
| Intelligence | 0 | 1 | ||
| Agentic work | 0 | 1 | ||
| Reasoning | 0 | 3 | ||
| Math | 0 | 4 | ||
| Knowledge | 0 | 7 | ||
| General | 1 | 1 | ||
| All shared boards | 1 | 21 |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index04
| Benchmark | Command A | Kimi K2 Thinking | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified | Not measured | 63.4% | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| AA Coding Index | 27.8 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) | 35.1% | 63.1% | Kimi K2 Thinking |
| SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI) | 7.8% | 60.2% | Kimi K2 Thinking |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI) | 17.6% | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) | 28.7% | 85.3% | Kimi K2 Thinking |
| SciCode | 38.5% | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | 25.0% | 31.1% | Kimi K2 Thinking |
| Terminal-Bench | Not measured | 35.7% | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| WeirdML | Not measured | 42.8% | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| ALE-Bench | Not measured | 597.5 | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| LMArena Text: coding | 1330 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: software and IT | 1336 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 25 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | Command A | Kimi K2 Thinking | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 13.1 | 22.0 | Kimi K2 Thinking |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | Not measured | 145.8 | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | Command A | Kimi K2 Thinking | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Agentic Index | 1.0 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| Finance Agent (Vals AI) | 9.0% | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| τ²-Bench Telecom | 80.7% | 93.0% | Kimi K2 Thinking |
| METR time horizons | Not measured | 59.2% | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 35 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index03
| Benchmark | Command A | Kimi K2 Thinking | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 48.5% | 78.5% | Kimi K2 Thinking |
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 76.1% | 83.8% | Kimi K2 Thinking |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 12.0% | 23.8% | Kimi K2 Thinking |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts | 1326 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: expert | 1296 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts in English | 1335 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here | |||
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
| Benchmark | Command A | Kimi K2 Thinking | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AIME | 13.3% | 85.4% | Kimi K2 Thinking |
| MATH 500 (Vals AI) | 76.2% | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| MGSM (Vals AI) | 85.7% | 90.2% | Kimi K2 Thinking |
| AA Math Index | 13.0 | 94.7 | Kimi K2 Thinking |
| AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run) | 13.0% | 94.7% | Kimi K2 Thinking |
| LMArena Text: math | 1300 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: mathematical work | 1312 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here | |||
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index07
| Benchmark | Command A | Kimi K2 Thinking | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro | 69.2% | 81.1% | Kimi K2 Thinking |
| LegalBench (Vals AI) | 79.7% | 80.2% | Kimi K2 Thinking |
| CaseLaw (Vals AI) | 64.5% | 65.7% | Kimi K2 Thinking |
| CorpFin (Vals AI) | 46.0% | 60.6% | Kimi K2 Thinking |
| TaxEval (Vals AI) | 61.4% | 71.7% | Kimi K2 Thinking |
| MedQA (Vals AI) | 80.5% | 92.6% | Kimi K2 Thinking |
| MedCode (Vals AI) | 19.7% | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run) | 71.2% | 84.8% | Kimi K2 Thinking |
| LMArena Text: science | 1339 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare | 1334 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: legal and government | 1348 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: business and finance | 1315 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here | |||
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
| Benchmark | Command A | Kimi K2 Thinking | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: websites | Not measured | 1113 | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here | |||
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index11
| Benchmark | Command A | Kimi K2 Thinking | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MedScribe (Vals AI) | 55.7% | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| IFBench | 73.9% | 68.1% | Command A |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 52.7% | 72.0% | Kimi K2 Thinking |
| DTBench | 61.3% | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMCA | 10.3% | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| CL-bench | Not measured | 17.6% | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| LMArena Text | 1331 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: instruction following | 1309 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: creative writing | 1319 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: English | 1344 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: non-English | 1313 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: Chinese | 1327 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: German | 1342 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: Japanese | 1285 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: Korean | 1285 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: French | 1351 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: Spanish | 1347 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: Russian | 1314 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: Polish | 1324 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: multi-turn | 1338 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: longer queries | 1334 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: writing and language | 1328 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: entertainment and media | 1306 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 23 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Command A | Kimi K2 Thinking | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 5 boards here | |||
What each workload costs
Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.
Chat turn
1K input + 500 output tokens
Kimi K2 Thinking costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Kimi K2 Thinking costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Kimi K2 Thinking costs less
Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.
Specification differences
The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.
| Specification | Cohere Command A | MoonshotAI Kimi K2 Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Cohere | Moonshot AI |
| Weights | Open weights | Open weights |
| Released | March 13, 2025 | November 6, 2025 |
| Context window | 256K | 262K |
| Input $/Mtok | $2.50 | $0.60 |
| Output $/Mtok | $10.00 | $2.50 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | Not benchmarked |
| Independent measurements behind it | 1 | 1 |
| Cost per solved task | $2.69 | $0.61 |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Command A better than Kimi K2 Thinking for coding?
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Command A has the edge where what matters is LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) or SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI), where it leads.
Which is cheaper, Command A or Kimi K2 Thinking?
Command A costs $2.50 per million input tokens and $10.00 per million output tokens; Kimi K2 Thinking costs $0.60 and $2.50. Per solved SWE-bench Verified task, Command A costs $2.69 and Kimi K2 Thinking $0.61.
Which has the bigger context window, Command A or Kimi K2 Thinking?
Kimi K2 Thinking, with 262K tokens against 256K.
How many benchmarks is the Command A vs Kimi K2 Thinking comparison based on?
22 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Command A's coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark and Kimi K2 Thinking's on 1. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.