Kimi K2 Thinking vs Moondream 3.1
Updated October 21, 2026. 0 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.
- Coding
- No data
- Overall
- 22.0
- Output $/M
- $2.50
- Coding
- No data
- Overall
- No data
- Output $/M
- $2.50
Decision reading
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Kimi K2 Thinking has the edge where the context window is larger, 262K against 32K tokens.
- Shared results
- 0
- Kimi K2 Thinking only
- 30
- Moondream 3.1 only
- 0
- Like-for-like categories
- 0 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
No call
Only Kimi K2 Thinking has a AA Intelligence Index result, 22.0.
Directional only
Reasoning
GPQA Diamond
No call
Only Kimi K2 Thinking has a GPQA Diamond result, 78.5%.
Directional only
Math
AIME
No call
Only Kimi K2 Thinking has a AIME result, 85.4%.
Directional only
Knowledge
MMLU Pro
No call
Only Kimi K2 Thinking has a MMLU Pro result, 81.1%.
Directional only
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 32K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Moondream 3.1
Kimi K2 Thinking $0.0019, Moondream 3.1 $0.0015 per turn.
List prices
Cost per solved task
One SWE-bench Verified task, solved
No call
Only Kimi K2 Thinking has the number, $0.61.
Directional only
At a glance
- Coding index
- Kimi K2 Thinking not benchmarked, Moondream 3.1 not benchmarked.
- Widest category
- No category has a result for both models.
- Widest single gap
- No benchmark has a result for both models.
- Output price
- Both cost $2.50 per million output tokens.
- Context window
- Kimi K2 Thinking takes 262K tokens, Moondream 3.1 32K.
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.
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index8 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Kimi K2 Thinking | Moondream 3.1 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified | 63.4% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) | 63.1% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI) | 60.2% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) | 85.3% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | 31.1% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| Terminal-Bench | 35.7% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| WeirdML | 42.8% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| ALE-Bench | 597.5 | Not measured | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 30 boards here | |||
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Kimi K2 Thinking | Moondream 3.1 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 22.0 | Not measured | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 145.8 | Not measured | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Kimi K2 Thinking | Moondream 3.1 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| τ²-Bench Telecom | 93.0% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| METR time horizons | 59.2% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 37 boards here | |||
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index3 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Kimi K2 Thinking | Moondream 3.1 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 78.5% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 83.8% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 23.8% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 18 boards here | |||
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Kimi K2 Thinking | Moondream 3.1 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AIME | 85.4% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| MGSM (Vals AI) | 90.2% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| AA Math Index | 94.7 | Not measured | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run) | 94.7% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here | |||
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Kimi K2 Thinking | Moondream 3.1 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro | 81.1% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| LegalBench (Vals AI) | 80.2% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| CaseLaw (Vals AI) | 65.7% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| CorpFin (Vals AI) | 60.6% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| TaxEval (Vals AI) | 71.7% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| MedQA (Vals AI) | 92.6% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run) | 84.8% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here | |||
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
| Benchmark | Kimi K2 Thinking | Moondream 3.1 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: websites | 1113 | Not measured | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here | |||
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index3 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Kimi K2 Thinking | Moondream 3.1 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| IFBench | 68.1% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 72.0% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| CL-bench | 17.6% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2 Thinking 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 Thinking | Moondream 3.1 | 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
Moondream 3.1 costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Moondream 3.1 costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Moondream 3.1 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 Thinking | Moondream 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Moonshot AI | Moondream |
| Weights | Open weights | Open weights |
| Released | November 6, 2025 | October 15, 2026 |
| Context window | 262K | 32K |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.60 | $0.30 |
| Output $/Mtok | $2.50 | $2.50 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | Not benchmarked |
| Independent measurements behind it | 1 | 0 |
| Cost per solved task | $0.61 | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Kimi K2 Thinking better than Moondream 3.1 for coding?
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Kimi K2 Thinking has the edge where the context window is larger, 262K against 32K tokens.
Which is cheaper, Kimi K2 Thinking or Moondream 3.1?
Kimi K2 Thinking costs $0.60 per million input tokens and $2.50 per million output tokens; Moondream 3.1 costs $0.30 and $2.50. Cost per solved task is known for Kimi K2 Thinking only.
Which has the bigger context window, Kimi K2 Thinking or Moondream 3.1?
Kimi K2 Thinking, with 262K tokens against 32K.
How many benchmarks is the Kimi K2 Thinking vs Moondream 3.1 comparison based on?
0 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Kimi K2 Thinking's coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark and Moondream 3.1's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.