Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite vs Kimi K2.7 Code

Updated October 21, 2026. 12 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.

Replace Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Replace Kimi K2.7 Code
Gemini 3.1 Flash LiteGoogle
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$1.50
1
Kimi K2.7 CodeMoonshot AI
Coding
53.4
Overall
25.8
Output $/M
$4.00
11
vs boards won of 12 shared

Decision reading

Only Kimi K2.7 Code has a coding score, 53.4 on the Vibe Coding Index; Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite has the edge where output tokens cost 2.7x less, and where the context window is larger, 1.05M against 262K tokens.

Model AGemini 3.1 Flash LiteGoogleNot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved taskModel BKimi K2.7 CodeMoonshot AI53.4/1004 independent benchmarks$0.35 per solved task
Shared results
12
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite only
3
Kimi K2.7 Code only
39
Like-for-like categories
6 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.

At a glance

Coding index
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite not benchmarked, Kimi K2.7 Code 53.4 from 4 benchmarks.
Widest category
Agentic work, 58.8 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
τ²-Bench Telecom: Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite 31.3% against Kimi K2.7 Code 90.1%, 58.8 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite $1.50 against Kimi K2.7 Code $4.00 per million output tokens, 2.7x apart.
Context window
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite takes 1.05M tokens, Kimi K2.7 Code 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.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryGemini 3.1 Flash LiteBarsKimi K2.7 CodeTies
Coding03
Intelligence01
Agentic work01
Reasoning03
Math02
General11
All shared boards111
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index03
Coding benchmarks for Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite and Kimi K2.7 Code
BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Flash LiteKimi K2.7 CodeLeader
LMArena WebDevNot measured1474Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
AA Coding IndexNot measured60.8Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)Not measured82.0%Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)Not measured78.2%Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)Not measured47.2%Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
Code migration (Vals AI)Not measured25.4%Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
ProgramBench (Vals AI)Not measured0.0%Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)Not measured67.0%Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
SkillsBench (Vals AI)Not measured50.0%Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
SciCode43.4%47.8%Kimi K2.7 Code
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)24.2%44.7%Kimi K2.7 Code
FrontierCodeNot measured30.1%Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
WeirdML52.2%54.1%Kimi K2.7 Code
ALE-BenchNot measured886.2Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
LMArena WebDev: ReactNot measured1475Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
LMArena WebDev: HTMLNot measured1451Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
LMArena WebDev: from an imageNot measured1513Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
Neither model has a result on the other 21 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite and Kimi K2.7 Code
BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Flash LiteKimi K2.7 CodeLeader
AA Intelligence IndexNot measured25.8Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
Epoch Capabilities Index144.3150.1Kimi K2.7 Code
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Agentic work benchmarks for Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite and Kimi K2.7 Code
BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Flash LiteKimi K2.7 CodeLeader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured21.0Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
Design Arena: agents building web appsNot measured1176Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
Design Arena: agents building full-stack appsNot measured1175Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile appsNot measured1143Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
Design Arena: agents building Android appsNot measured1143Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
Design Arena: agents building Godot gamesNot measured1147Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
Design Arena: agents building gamesNot measured1131Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
Design Arena: HTML slidesNot measured1201Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
Design Arena: PowerPoint slidesNot measured1154Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
τ²-Bench Telecom31.3%90.1%Kimi K2.7 Code
APEX-AgentsNot measured37.6%Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
DeepResearch Bench37.3%Not measuredOnly Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite measured
Vending-Bench 2Not measured$5,083Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
Neither model has a result on the other 26 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index03
Reasoning benchmarks for Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite and Kimi K2.7 Code
BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Flash LiteKimi K2.7 CodeLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)82.2%89.6%Kimi K2.7 Code
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)17.2%35.0%Kimi K2.7 Code
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)81.8%87.9%Kimi K2.7 Code
SimpleBenchNot measured57.9%Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
Chess puzzlesNot measured14.0%Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Math benchmarks for Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite and Kimi K2.7 Code
BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Flash LiteKimi K2.7 CodeLeader
OTIS Mock AIME80.0%95.6%Kimi K2.7 Code
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 327.7%54.0%Kimi K2.7 Code
FrontierMath, tier 4Not measured12.2%Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite and Kimi K2.7 Code
BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Flash LiteKimi K2.7 CodeLeader
SimpleQA VerifiedNot measured36.5%Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite and Kimi K2.7 Code
BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Flash LiteKimi K2.7 CodeLeader
Design Arena: websitesNot measured1264Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
Design Arena: UI componentsNot measured1259Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
Design Arena: game devNot measured1220Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
Design Arena: data vizNot measured1227Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
Design Arena: 3DNot measured1241Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
Design Arena: all code categoriesNot measured1253Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
Design Arena: SVGNot measured1176Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
Design Arena: ASCII artNot measured1196Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index11
General benchmarks for Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite and Kimi K2.7 Code
BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Flash LiteKimi K2.7 CodeLeader
IFBench77.2%63.1%Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)74.3%79.3%Kimi K2.7 Code
DTBench76.8%Not measuredOnly Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite measured
LMCA35.0%Not measuredOnly Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite measured
Surface Evolver BenchNot measured48.8%Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured
Neither model has a result on the other 41 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite and Kimi K2.7 Code
BenchmarkGemini 3.1 Flash LiteKimi K2.7 CodeLeader
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

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite$0.0010Fits in one request
Kimi K2.7 Code$0.0029Fits in one request

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite$0.017Fits in one request
Kimi K2.7 Code$0.059Fits in one request

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite$0.065Fits in one request
Kimi K2.7 Code$0.230Fits in one request

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite 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.

Specifications of Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite and Kimi K2.7 Code
SpecificationGoogle Gemini 3.1 Flash LiteMoonshotAI Kimi K2.7 Code
MakerGoogleMoonshot AI
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedMay 7, 2026June 12, 2026
Context window1.05M262K
Input $/Mtok$0.25$0.95
Output $/Mtok$1.50$4.00
Coding indexNot benchmarked53.4
Independent measurements behind it04
Cost per solved taskNot computable$0.35
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite better than Kimi K2.7 Code for coding?

Only Kimi K2.7 Code has a coding score, 53.4 on the Vibe Coding Index; Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite has the edge where output tokens cost 2.7x less, and where the context window is larger, 1.05M against 262K tokens.

Which is cheaper, Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite or Kimi K2.7 Code?

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite costs $0.25 per million input tokens and $1.50 per million output tokens; Kimi K2.7 Code costs $0.95 and $4.00. Cost per solved task is known for Kimi K2.7 Code only.

Which has the bigger context window, Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite or Kimi K2.7 Code?

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite, with 1.05M tokens against 262K.

How many benchmarks is the Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite vs Kimi K2.7 Code comparison based on?

12 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Kimi K2.7 Code's on 4. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next