Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GPT-5.2-Codex vs Kimi K3.1 Pro

Kimi K3.1 Pro leads GPT-5.2-Codex on coding, 82.2 to 45.4 on the Vibe Coding Index, and Kimi K3.1 Pro costs 1.4x less per output token ($10.00 vs $14.00 per million). Updated October 29, 2026; 7 benchmarks have a result for both.

GPT-5.2-CodexOpenAI
Coding
45.4
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$14.00
0
Kimi K3.1 ProMoonshot AI
Coding
82.2
Overall
74.4
Output $/M
$10.00
7
vs boards won of 7 shared

GPT-5.2-Codex or Kimi K3.1 Pro: which to pick

Pick Kimi K3.1 Pro for coding: it scores 82.2 on the Vibe Coding Index against 45.4 for GPT-5.2-Codex.

GPT-5.2-Codex is neither cheaper nor larger in context, and leads no benchmark both models were measured on.

Shared results
7
GPT-5.2-Codex only
14
Kimi K3.1 Pro only
28
Like-for-like categories
3 of 9

Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.

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
GPT-5.2-Codex 45.4 from 3 benchmarks, Kimi K3.1 Pro 82.2 from 4 benchmarks.
Widest category
Coding, 41.2 points apart on average over 5 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
LMArena WebDev: GPT-5.2-Codex 1339 against Kimi K3.1 Pro 1695, 50.8 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GPT-5.2-Codex $14.00 against Kimi K3.1 Pro $10.00 per million output tokens, 1.4x apart.
Context window
GPT-5.2-Codex takes 400K tokens, Kimi K3.1 Pro 1.05M.

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
CategoryGPT-5.2-CodexBarsKimi K3.1 ProTies
Coding05
Reasoning01
General01
All shared boards07
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index05
Coding benchmarks for GPT-5.2-Codex and Kimi K3.1 Pro
BenchmarkGPT-5.2-CodexKimi K3.1 ProLeader
SWE-bench Verified72.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2-Codex measured
SWE-bench Multilingual66.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2-Codex measured
LiveBench codingNot measured81.8%Only Kimi K3.1 Pro measured
LMArena WebDev13391695Kimi K3.1 Pro
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)88.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2-Codex measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)72.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2-Codex measured
Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI)Not measured63.6%Only Kimi K3.1 Pro measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)37.9%84.9%Kimi K3.1 Pro
IOI (Vals AI)Not measured81.9%Only Kimi K3.1 Pro measured
SciCodeNot measured60.8%Only Kimi K3.1 Pro measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)37.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2-Codex measured
Terminal-Bench66.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2-Codex measured
ALE-Bench1299.91932.8Kimi K3.1 Pro
LMArena WebDev: React13291701Kimi K3.1 Pro
LMArena WebDev: HTML13491706Kimi K3.1 Pro
Neither model has a result on the other 28 boards here
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
Intelligence benchmarks for GPT-5.2-Codex and Kimi K3.1 Pro
BenchmarkGPT-5.2-CodexKimi K3.1 ProLeader
AA Intelligence IndexNot measured46.0Only Kimi K3.1 Pro measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index15 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for GPT-5.2-Codex and Kimi K3.1 Pro
BenchmarkGPT-5.2-CodexKimi K3.1 ProLeader
Design Arena: agents building web apps1052Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2-Codex measured
Design Arena: agents building full-stack apps993Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2-Codex measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile apps1089Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2-Codex measured
Design Arena: agents building Android apps1176Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2-Codex measured
Design Arena: agents building Godot games1142Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2-Codex measured
LiveBench researchNot measured77.9%Only Kimi K3.1 Pro measured
LiveBench browserNot measured75.9%Only Kimi K3.1 Pro measured
LiveBench long agenticNot measured39.1%Only Kimi K3.1 Pro measured
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)Not measured24.9%Only Kimi K3.1 Pro measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)Not measured37.5%Only Kimi K3.1 Pro measured
Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark (Vals AI)Not measured11.7%Only Kimi K3.1 Pro measured
BioMysteryBench (Vals AI)Not measured75.6%Only Kimi K3.1 Pro measured
Terminal-Bench-Science (Vals AI)Not measured31.4%Only Kimi K3.1 Pro measured
Vals Science IndexNot measured44.4%Only Kimi K3.1 Pro measured
τ²-Bench Telecom92.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2-Codex measured
Neither model has a result on the other 27 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Reasoning benchmarks for GPT-5.2-Codex and Kimi K3.1 Pro
BenchmarkGPT-5.2-CodexKimi K3.1 ProLeader
LiveBench reasoningNot measured91.1%Only Kimi K3.1 Pro measured
MysteryMechanism (Vals AI)Not measured26.1%Only Kimi K3.1 Pro measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)89.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2-Codex measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)35.7%52.5%Kimi K3.1 Pro
Neither model has a result on the other 19 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for GPT-5.2-Codex and Kimi K3.1 Pro
BenchmarkGPT-5.2-CodexKimi K3.1 ProLeader
ProofBenchNot measured91.0%Only Kimi K3.1 Pro measured
MathArenaNot measured59.6%Only Kimi K3.1 Pro measured
Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here
KnowledgeNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for GPT-5.2-Codex and Kimi K3.1 Pro
BenchmarkGPT-5.2-CodexKimi K3.1 ProLeader
Neither model has a result on 20 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for GPT-5.2-Codex and Kimi K3.1 Pro
BenchmarkGPT-5.2-CodexKimi K3.1 ProLeader
Design Arena: websitesNot measured1325Only Kimi K3.1 Pro measured
Design Arena: UI componentsNot measured1400Only Kimi K3.1 Pro measured
Design Arena: game devNot measured1410Only Kimi K3.1 Pro measured
Design Arena: data vizNot measured1300Only Kimi K3.1 Pro measured
Design Arena: 3DNot measured1451Only Kimi K3.1 Pro measured
Design Arena: all code categoriesNot measured1354Only Kimi K3.1 Pro measured
Design Arena: SVGNot measured1328Only Kimi K3.1 Pro measured
LiveBench designNot measured77.8%Only Kimi K3.1 Pro measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
General benchmarks for GPT-5.2-Codex and Kimi K3.1 Pro
BenchmarkGPT-5.2-CodexKimi K3.1 ProLeader
Vals IndexNot measured62.5%Only Kimi K3.1 Pro measured
LiveBench data analysisNot measured79.1%Only Kimi K3.1 Pro measured
IFBench77.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2-Codex measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)82.3%86.3%Kimi K3.1 Pro
Neither model has a result on the other 44 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GPT-5.2-Codex and Kimi K3.1 Pro
BenchmarkGPT-5.2-CodexKimi K3.1 ProLeader
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

GPT-5.2-Codex$0.0088Fits in one request
Kimi K3.1 Pro$0.0070Fits in one request

Kimi K3.1 Pro costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GPT-5.2-Codex$0.130Fits in one request
Kimi K3.1 Pro$0.130Fits in one request

GPT-5.2-Codex costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GPT-5.2-Codex$0.490Fits in one request
Kimi K3.1 Pro$0.500Fits in one request

GPT-5.2-Codex 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 GPT-5.2-Codex and Kimi K3.1 Pro
SpecificationOpenAI GPT-5.2-CodexMoonshotAI Kimi K3.1 Pro
MakerOpenAIMoonshot AI
WeightsNo public weights listedNo public weights listed
ReleasedJanuary 14, 2026October 23, 2026
Context window400K1.05M
Input $/Mtok$1.75$2.00
Output $/Mtok$14.00$10.00
Coding index45.482.2
Independent measurements behind it34
Cost per solved task$0.43Not computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GPT-5.2-Codex better than Kimi K3.1 Pro for coding?

Pick Kimi K3.1 Pro for coding: it scores 82.2 on the Vibe Coding Index against 45.4 for GPT-5.2-Codex. GPT-5.2-Codex is neither cheaper nor larger in context, and leads no benchmark both models were measured on.

Which is cheaper, GPT-5.2-Codex or Kimi K3.1 Pro?

GPT-5.2-Codex costs $1.75 per million input tokens and $14.00 per million output tokens; Kimi K3.1 Pro costs $2.00 and $10.00. Cost per solved task is known for GPT-5.2-Codex only.

Which has the bigger context window, GPT-5.2-Codex or Kimi K3.1 Pro?

Kimi K3.1 Pro, with 1.05M tokens against 400K.

How many benchmarks is the GPT-5.2-Codex vs Kimi K3.1 Pro comparison based on?

7 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 29, 2026. GPT-5.2-Codex's coding index rests on 3 independent benchmarks and Kimi K3.1 Pro's on 4. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next

Embed this comparison on your site

Free under CC BY 4.0, while the source link stays visible. Preview the frame · Terms and other embeds

<iframe src="https://llmbenchmark.ai/embed/compare/gpt-5-2-codex-vs-kimi-k3-1-pro" title="GPT-5.2-Codex vs Kimi K3.1 Pro, LLMBenchmark.ai" width="100%" height="360" style="border:0;max-width:100%" loading="lazy"></iframe>
<p style="font:13px/1.4 sans-serif;margin:6px 0 0">Source: <a href="https://llmbenchmark.ai/compare/gpt-5-2-codex-vs-kimi-k3-1-pro">LLMBenchmark.ai, GPT-5.2-Codex vs Kimi K3.1 Pro</a></p>