Model Comparison
V3.2 (Reasoning)
vs. Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning)
Comparing 2 AI models · 10 benchmarks · DeepSeek, MoonshotAI
Recommended Pick
Mo Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) 9 metric wins Strongest on: Throughput, Intelligence, Coding
Best Value
V3.2 (Reasoning)
100.0 value score
66.4 reasoning / $0.34/1M
Lowest Price
V3.2 (Reasoning)
$0.30/1M input price
Best Reasoning
V3.2 (Reasoning)
66.4 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning)
39.6 coding index
Composite Indices
Higher is better; speed and price are normalized
Standard Benchmarks
Only benchmarks with data are shown
Differences That Matter
Best value
V3.2 (Reasoning) has the strongest quality-to-price mix at 100.0 out of 100 value points.
Price gap
V3.2 (Reasoning) is 1.9x cheaper on input tokens than Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning).
Reasoning gap
V3.2 (Reasoning) leads Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) by 11.7 points on reasoning.
Coding gap
Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) leads V3.2 (Reasoning) by 2.9 points on coding.
Top-pick rationale
Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) wins 9 measurable categories, including Throughput, Intelligence, Coding, GPQA.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
V3.2 (Reasoning)
DeepSeek
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning)
MoonshotAI
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Full Comparison
| Metric | De V3.2 (Reasoning) | Top Pick Mo Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $0.30/1M | $0.58/1M |
| Output Cost | $0.45/1M | $3.00/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.34/1M | $1.19/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | DeepSeek | MoonshotAI |
| Release Date | Dec 1, 2025 | Jan 27, 2026 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | — | 44.7 tok/s |
| TTFT | — | 1234ms |
| Latency | — | 67568ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 100.0 | 23.5 |
| Reasoning Score | 66.4 | 54.7 |
| Intelligence | 41.7 | 46.8 |
| Coding | 36.7 | 39.6 |
| Math | 92.0 | — |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 84.0% | 87.9% |
| MMLU Pro | 86.2% | — |
| HLE | 22.2% | 29.4% |
| LiveCodeBench | 86.2% | — |
| AIME 2025 | 92.0% | — |
| SciCode | 38.9% | 49.0% |
| LCR | 65.0% | 65.3% |
| IFBench | 60.7% | 70.2% |
| TAU-bench v2 | 90.6% | 95.9% |
| TerminalBench Hard | 35.6% | 34.8% |
Key Takeaways
V3.2 (Reasoning) offers the best value at $0.30/1M, making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
V3.2 (Reasoning) has the strongest reasoning profile with a 66.4 reasoning score, combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) reaches a 39.6 coding index, making it the top choice for software development and code generation tasks.
All models support context windows of ∞+ tokens, suitable for processing lengthy documents and maintaining extended conversations.
When to Choose Each Model
V3.2 (Reasoning)
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning)
- Code generation
- Software development
