whichllmmodel
Back to Dashboard
Google

Gemini 3.5 Flash

VS
Moonshot AI (Kimi)

kimi-k2.5

✍️ Analysis by:the whichllmmodel Editorial Team|📅 Updated: June 2026

Decision Recommendation

⚖️ Editorial Verdict: In our analysis, Gemini 3.5 Flash is the premium intelligence choice, scoring 4.4% higher on coding benchmarks. However, this accuracy premium comes with a cost overhead: kimi-k2.5 is 2.8x cheaper to run. If you are building high-volume, simple chatbots or processing massive amounts of text where budget is critical, kimi-k2.5 offers excellent cost savings. For agentic reasoning, code refactoring, or complex logical tasks, the accuracy premium of Gemini 3.5 Flash fully justifies the cost.

Model Specs

Gemini 3.5 Flash

Benchmarks & Scores

Coding (swe-bench-pro)Winner (+4.4%)
55.1%
Reasoning (gpqa-diamond)Winner (+4.6%)
92.2%

Cost & Performance

Cost (per 1M tokens)
$3.38Input: $1.50 | Output: $9.00
Speed1.5x faster
280 tps
Context WindowLarger
1M tokens
Model Specs

kimi-k2.5

Benchmarks & Scores

Coding (swe-bench-pro)
50.7%
Reasoning (gpqa-diamond)
87.6%

Cost & Performance

Cost (per 1M tokens)2.8x cheaper
$1.20Input: $0.60 | Output: $3.00
Speed
193 tps
Context Window
262.14k tokens
Read our data collection methodology

Frequently Asked Questions

kimi-k2.5 is cheaper than Gemini 3.5 Flash. kimi-k2.5 has a blended cost of $1.20/1M tokens, which is about 2.8x cheaper than Gemini 3.5 Flash at $3.38/1M tokens.

Gemini 3.5 Flash is faster than kimi-k2.5. Gemini 3.5 Flash generates 280 tokens per second (tps) compared to kimi-k2.5 which generates 193 tokens per second.

Gemini 3.5 Flash is better for coding tasks. It scores 55.1% on coding evaluations (swe-bench-pro) compared to kimi-k2.5 which scores 50.7%.

Want to customize weights or add more models?

Open our interactive dashboard where you can adjust your priority levels for speed, budget, or accuracy slider-bars and watch model rankings calculate dynamically.

Customize in Interactive Dashboard