Kimi K2 0905 vs Step 3.7 Flash
Updated October 21, 2026. 10 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.
Kimi K2 0905 has the edge where what matters is Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) or ALE-Bench, where it leads.
- Shared results
- 10
- Kimi K2 0905 only
- 6
- Step 3.7 Flash only
- 8
- 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.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Neither has a coding score yet.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
Step 3.7 Flash
Step 3.7 Flash leads, 19.5 against 15.3.
Same board, both measured
Web design
Design Arena: websites
Step 3.7 Flash
Step 3.7 Flash leads, 1196 against 1089.
Same board, both measured
Long documents
Listed context window
No call
Both take 262K tokens.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Step 3.7 Flash
Kimi K2 0905 $0.0019, Step 3.7 Flash $0.0008 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- Kimi K2 0905 not benchmarked, Step 3.7 Flash not benchmarked.
- Widest category
- Agentic work, 25.1 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
- Widest single gap
- IFBench: Kimi K2 0905 41.7% against Step 3.7 Flash 67.3%, 25.6 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Kimi K2 0905 $2.50 against Step 3.7 Flash $1.15 per million output tokens, 2.2x apart.
- Context window
- Both take 262K tokens.
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 | Kimi K2 0905 | Bars | Step 3.7 Flash | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 0 | 2 | ||
| Intelligence | 0 | 1 | ||
| Agentic work | 0 | 1 | ||
| Reasoning | 0 | 2 | ||
| Web design | 0 | 2 | ||
| General | 0 | 2 | ||
| All shared boards | 0 | 10 |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index02
| Benchmark | Kimi K2 0905 | Step 3.7 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Coding Index | Not measured | 39.6 | Only Step 3.7 Flash measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) | 61.0% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2 0905 measured |
| SciCode | Not measured | 43.9% | Only Step 3.7 Flash measured |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | 23.5% | 35.6% | Step 3.7 Flash |
| WeirdML | 36.7% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2 0905 measured |
| ALE-Bench | 267.1 | 694.1 | Step 3.7 Flash |
| Neither model has a result on the other 32 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | Kimi K2 0905 | Step 3.7 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 15.3 | 19.5 | Step 3.7 Flash |
| Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here | |||
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | Kimi K2 0905 | Step 3.7 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| τ²-Bench Telecom | 73.4% | 98.5% | Step 3.7 Flash |
| Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
| Benchmark | Kimi K2 0905 | Step 3.7 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 76.7% | 80.9% | Step 3.7 Flash |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 6.4% | 21.4% | Step 3.7 Flash |
| 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
| Benchmark | Kimi K2 0905 | Step 3.7 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Math Index | 57.3 | Not measured | Only Kimi K2 0905 measured |
| AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run) | 57.3% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2 0905 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here | |||
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
| Benchmark | Kimi K2 0905 | Step 3.7 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run) | 81.9% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2 0905 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here | |||
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
| Benchmark | Kimi K2 0905 | Step 3.7 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: websites | 1089 | 1196 | Step 3.7 Flash |
| Design Arena: UI components | Not measured | 1179 | Only Step 3.7 Flash measured |
| Design Arena: game dev | Not measured | 1158 | Only Step 3.7 Flash measured |
| Design Arena: data viz | Not measured | 1172 | Only Step 3.7 Flash measured |
| Design Arena: 3D | Not measured | 1129 | Only Step 3.7 Flash measured |
| Design Arena: all code categories | 1098 | 1182 | Step 3.7 Flash |
| Design Arena: SVG | Not measured | 1085 | Only Step 3.7 Flash measured |
| Design Arena: ASCII art | Not measured | 1152 | Only Step 3.7 Flash measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here | |||
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
| Benchmark | Kimi K2 0905 | Step 3.7 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| IFBench | 41.7% | 67.3% | Step 3.7 Flash |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 53.0% | 73.7% | Step 3.7 Flash |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 66.7% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2 0905 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 43 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Kimi K2 0905 | Step 3.7 Flash | 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
Step 3.7 Flash costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Step 3.7 Flash costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Step 3.7 Flash 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 | MoonshotAI Kimi K2 0905 | StepFun Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Moonshot AI | StepFun |
| Weights | Open weights | Open weights |
| Released | September 4, 2025 | May 28, 2026 |
| Context window | 262K | 262K |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.60 | $0.20 |
| Output $/Mtok | $2.50 | $1.15 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | Not benchmarked |
| Independent measurements behind it | 0 | 0 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Kimi K2 0905 better than Step 3.7 Flash for coding?
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Kimi K2 0905 has the edge where what matters is Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) or ALE-Bench, where it leads.
Which is cheaper, Kimi K2 0905 or Step 3.7 Flash?
Kimi K2 0905 costs $0.60 per million input tokens and $2.50 per million output tokens; Step 3.7 Flash costs $0.20 and $1.15. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, Kimi K2 0905 or Step 3.7 Flash?
Neither: both take 262K tokens.
How many benchmarks is the Kimi K2 0905 vs Step 3.7 Flash comparison based on?
10 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Kimi K2 0905's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Step 3.7 Flash's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.