- Score
- 9.4 (+0.55 points)
- Total Cost (Current Price)
- $0.183 · 90.1% cheaper
- Response Time (avg)
- 6.24s · 86.9% faster
Summary
Kimi K3.1 Pro scores 8.8 on AI BENCHY and ranks #60. It has 8.4 reliability, a 81.2% pass rate, $1.836 total cost, and 47.50s average response time.
Recommended alternatives
We recommend choosing one of these models instead:
- Score
- 9.1 (+0.30 points)
- Total Cost (Current Price)
- $0.140 · 92.4% cheaper
- Response Time (avg)
- 16.58s · 65.1% faster
- Score
- 9.6 (+0.74 points)
- Total Cost (Current Price)
- $0.460 · 75.0% cheaper
- Response Time (avg)
- 7.15s · 84.9% faster
Model facts
Researched on 2026-10-24
- Parameters
- ~2.8T total (~104B active)
- Architecture
- MoE
- Availability
- Closed
- License
- -
Best estimate from public evidence; the vendor did not disclose every value. API-only exact checkpoint on the research date. Moonshot says the full weights will be released by November 4; do not classify promised weights as available. Total and active parameter values are estimates inherited from the Kimi K3 backbone because the official Pro blog describes a post-trained K3 without restating exact counts. Native K3.1 Pro documentation requires thinking with low/high/max, which are the benchmarked modes. On the research date, the standard endpoint is $2/$10 per million; the same model has a faster $4/$20 endpoint. These benchmarks use standard speed.
8.8
Consistency
8.9
8.4
$1.836
Total Output Tokens
139,158
Total Input Tokens
221,802
Input Price
$2.000 / 1M
Output Price
$10.000 / 1M
Cache Read Price
$0.200 / 1M
Cache Write Price
N/A
Cache prices apply to input tokens. Reads reuse cached prompts; writes store them and can cost extra. Output tokens use the output price.
Flaky tests
3
Flaky tests had mixed outcomes across runs (at least one pass and one fail).
Hamster playing table tennis
Prompt: Create a detailed SVG illustration of a hamster playing table tennis.
#60 MoonshotAI: Kimi K3.1 Pro
low- Cost
- $0.000
- Time
- 10.7s
- Tokens
- 0 tok
Run history
| Tested on | Score | Reliability | Tests Correct | Total Cost | Compare |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-10-24 19:30 Re-test | 8.8 | 8.4 | $1.836 | Current run | |
| 2026-10-24 15:44 Initial run | 6.2 | 8.2 | $1.483 | Compare |
Run comparison
| Run | Benchmark coverage | Score | Consistency | Reliability | Tests Correct | Flaky tests | Total Output Tokens | Total Input Tokens | Total Cost | Response Time (avg) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-10-24 19:30 · Current run | 69/69 attempts | 8.8 | 8.9 | 8.4 | 17/23 | 3 | 139,158 | 221,802 | $1.836 | 47.50s |
| 2026-10-24 15:44 · Initial run | 69/69 attempts | 6.2 | 8.1 | 8.2 | 11/23 | 5 | 122,541 | 128,710 | $1.483 | 46.26s |
| Difference | — | +2.6 | +0.8 | +0.2 | +6 | -2 | +16617 | +93092 | +$0.353 | +1241ms |
Charts
Choose the first model, then click a second model to open a side-by-side page.
Top Models by Score
Score vs Total Cost
Response Time (avg)
Score vs Response Time (avg)
Total Output Tokens
Score vs Total Output Tokens
Quick Compare
Category Breakdown
| Category | Score | Consistency | Tests Correct |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agentic | 10.0 | 10.0 | |
| Anti-AI Tricks | 10.0 | 10.0 | |
| Coding | 10.0 | 10.0 | |
| Combined | 6.5 | 10.0 | |
| Data parsing and extraction | 10.0 | 10.0 | |
| Domain specific | 4.1 | 4.4 | |
| General Intelligence | 10.0 | 10.0 | |
| Instructions following | 10.0 | 10.0 | |
| Puzzle Solving | 7.6 | 7.2 | |
| Tool Calling | 10.0 | 10.0 | |
| Trivia | 3.0 | 10.0 |