Compare / head-to-head

Kimi K3vsMercury 2.5

Kimi K3 leads 1 of 1 shared benchmark. Mercury 2.5 is 18.9x cheaper per token. Kimi K3 has the larger context window (1.0M tokens).

Benchmarks from cited public sources; pricing from official pages; status from official provider feeds.

Shared benchmarks
1 – 0
Kimi K3 leads
Cheaper per token
Mercury 2.5
18.9x cheaper, input + output
Larger context
Kimi K3
1.0M tokens
Providers
2 providers
Moonshot AI · Inception
Kimi K3
Moonshot AI · released 2026-07-16
textvision
Context
1.0M
Max out
1.0M
Input /1M
$3 ↗
Output /1M
$15 ↗
Cached /1M
$0.3
Scores
87 · 11 core
Mercury 2.5
Inception · released 2026-09-08
text
Context
260K
Max out
66K
Input /1M
$0.2 ↗
Output /1M
$0.75 ↗
Cached /1M
$0.02
Scores
1 · 0 core
Quality

Benchmark matrix

BenchmarkKimi K3Mercury 2.5ΔEdge
Reported by both · 1
Terminal-Bench 4.0 (Vals AI)17.2% ↗0% ↗+17.2 ptKimi K3
Only Kimi K3 reports · 79
GPQA Diamond93.5% ↗not reported——
AIME 202696.7% ↗matharena ⚠not reported——
Humanity's Last Exam (no tools)43.5% ↗not reported——
LMArena Elo1488.4 ↗not reported——
AA-Briefcase1548 ↗not reported——
AA-LCR74.7% ↗not reported——
Agents' Last Exam28.3% ↗not reported——
APEX-Agents41% ↗not reported——
APEX-Agents (Mercor)50.6% ↗not reported——
AutomationBench30.8% ↗not reported——
BabyVision (with Python)85.7% ↗not reported——
BrowseComp (1M context, no compaction)90.4% ↗not reported——
BrowseComp (context compaction)91.2% ↗not reported——
CharXiv Reasoning (no tools)84.8% ↗not reported——
CharXiv Reasoning (with Python)91.3% ↗not reported——
Chess Puzzles (Epoch AI run)39% ↗epoch runnot reported——
CorpFin v271.6% ↗not reported——
CritPt23.4% ↗not reported——
DeepSearchQA (F1)95% ↗not reported——
DeepSWE v1.167.3% ↗not reported——
DeepSWE v1.1 (Datacurve)68.5% ↗not reported——
DeepSWE v1.1 (Kimi Code)67.5% ↗not reported——
Finance Agent v254.4% ↗not reported——
FrontierMath Tier 4 v2 (Epoch AI run)39% ↗epoch runnot reported——
FrontierMath Tiers 1-3 v2 (Epoch AI run)72.2% ↗epoch runnot reported——
FrontierSWE81.2% ↗not reported——
FrontierSWE V2 (Proximal Labs)25.9% ↗not reported——
Furniture Assembly (Epoch AI run)34.2% ↗epoch runnot reported——
GDPval-AA v21686 ↗not reported——
Harvey Lab-AA94.6% ↗not reported——
Humanity's Last Exam (with tools)56% ↗not reported——
JobBench54.3% ↗not reported——
Kimi Code Bench 2.072.9% ↗not reported——
Legal Research Bench44.2% ↗not reported——
LiveBench Agentic Coding (LiveBench)62.2% ↗not reported——
LiveBench Coding (LiveBench)81.4% ↗not reported——
LiveBench Data Analysis (LiveBench)78.7% ↗not reported——
LiveBench Instruction Following (LiveBench)71.4% ↗not reported——
LiveBench Language (LiveBench)85.5% ↗not reported——
LiveBench Mathematics (LiveBench)84.4% ↗not reported——
LiveBench Reasoning (LiveBench)90.7% ↗not reported——
LMArena Agent (LMArena)0.0418 ↗not reported——
LMArena WebDev (LMArena)1657.8 ↗not reported——
MathVision (no tools)94.3% ↗not reported——
MathVision (with Python)97.8% ↗not reported——
MCP-Atlas84.2% ↗not reported——
MCPMark-Verified94.5% ↗not reported——
MLS-Bench-Lite48.3% ↗not reported——
MMMU-Pro (no tools)81.6% ↗not reported——
MMMU-Pro (with Python)83.4% ↗not reported——
MMVU82.1% ↗not reported——
Mystery Game Puzzles (Epoch AI run)26% ↗epoch runnot reported——
OfficeQA Pro63.3% ↗not reported——
OmniDocBench91.1% ↗not reported——
OSWorld 2.058.3% ↗not reported——
OSWorld-Verified84.8% ↗not reported——
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 (Epoch AI run)97.2% ↗epoch runnot reported——
PerceptionBench58.5% ↗not reported——
PostTrainBench36.6% ↗not reported——
ProgramBench77.8% ↗not reported——
ResearchRubrics76.2% ↗not reported——
SaaS-Bench60.1% ↗not reported——
SAGE (Vals AI)52.8% ↗not reported——
SciCode58.7% ↗not reported——
SimpleBench (SimpleBench)60.7% ↗not reported——
SimpleQA Verified50.6% ↗epoch runnot reported——
SpreadsheetBench 234.8% ↗not reported——
SWE-Marathon42% ↗not reported——
tau2-bench Banking Knowledge (Sierra)37.1% ↗not reported——
tau3-Banking33.4% ↗not reported——
Terminal-Bench 2.188.3% ↗not reported——
Toolathlon-Verified76.5% ↗not reported——
Toolathlon-Verified (HKUST)76.5% ↗not reported——
Vending-Bench 2 (Andon Labs)5165.04 ↗not reported——
Video-MME (with subtitles)90% ↗not reported——
WeirdML (Håvard Tveit Ihle)82.6% ↗not reported——
WorldVQA ForceAnswer51% ↗not reported——
ZeroBench pass@5 (no tools)23% ↗not reported——
ZeroBench pass@5 (with Python)41% ↗not reported——
Only Mercury 2.5 reports · 0
Mercury 2.5 reports nothing Kimi K3 does not.
Scores tagged "epoch" or "matharena" are independent runs, used only where the lab has not published its own; ⚠ marks rows MathArena flags as released after the competition. Higher is better on every row. Δ is Kimi K3 minus Mercury 2.5 in the benchmark's own unit. "Not reported" means the lab has not published that figure; it is not a zero. ↗ opens the source.
Specs & pricing

Side by side

SpecKimi K3Mercury 2.5Edge
Context window1.0M tokens260K tokensKimi K3
Max output1.0M tokens66K tokensKimi K3
Input price / 1M$3 ↗$0.2 ↗Mercury 2.5
Output price / 1M$15 ↗$0.75 ↗Mercury 2.5
Cached input / 1M$0.3 ↗$0.02 ↗Mercury 2.5
Input + output / 1M
Lower is cheaper. List prices; batch, tool and regional fees excluded.
$18$0.95Mercury 2.5
Modalitiestext · visiontextKimi K3
Released2026-07-162026-09-08—
Cited benchmark scores871—
Reliability

Provider status

All providers →
More matchups

Kimi K3 vs …

Built by Respan
Which one wins on your data?

Public benchmarks are a starting point. Run Kimi K3 and Mercury 2.5 on your own prompts with Respan evals, or route to either through one gateway key with automatic failover.