Compare / head-to-head
Claude Opus 5.5vs
Kimi K2 Thinking
Claude Opus 5.5 leads 1 of 1 shared benchmark. Claude Opus 5.5 has the larger context window (1M tokens).
Benchmarks from cited public sources; pricing from official pages; status from official provider feeds.
Shared benchmarks
1 – 0
Claude Opus 5.5 leads
Cheaper per token
—
list price, input + output
Larger context
Claude Opus 5.5
1M tokens
Providers
2 providers
Anthropic · Moonshot AI
Claude Opus 5.5
Anthropic · released 2026-09-22
textvision
Kimi K2 Thinking
Moonshot AI · released 2025-11-06
text
- Context
- 256K
- Max out
- —
- Input /1M
- —
- Output /1M
- —
- Cached /1M
- —
- Scores
- 17 · 9 core
Quality
Benchmark matrix
1 shared · 33 only Claude Opus 5.5 · 16 only Kimi K2 Thinking| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Kimi K2 Thinking | Δ | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Reported by both · 1 | ||||
| SimpleBench (SimpleBench) | 88.4% ↗ | 39.6% ↗ | +48.8 pt | Claude Opus 5.5 |
| Only Claude Opus 5.5 reports · 33 | ||||
| GPQA Diamond | 90.6% ↗epoch run | not reported | — | — |
| LMArena Elo | 1503.7 ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| APEX-Agents (Mercor) | 73.5% ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| AutomationBench 1.0.6 | 40% ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| Chartography (with tools) | 89% ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| CursorBench 4.0 | 57.8% ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| EBR-bench (Epoch AI run) | 71.4% ↗epoch run | not reported | — | — |
| FrontierCode v1.1 (Main) | 54.4% ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 v2 (Epoch AI run) | 95% ↗epoch run | not reported | — | — |
| FrontierMath Tiers 1-3 v2 (Epoch AI run) | 91.2% ↗epoch run | not reported | — | — |
| FrontierSWE V2 (Proximal Labs) | 62.3% ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| Furniture Assembly (Epoch AI run) | 83.3% ↗epoch run | not reported | — | — |
| GDPval-AA v2.1 | 1846 ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| Humanity's Last Exam (with tools) | 67.7% ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| LiveBench Agentic Coding (LiveBench) | 71.7% ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| LiveBench Coding (LiveBench) | 89.3% ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis (LiveBench) | 80.3% ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| LiveBench Instruction Following (LiveBench) | 67% ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| LiveBench Language (LiveBench) | 86.3% ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| LiveBench Mathematics (LiveBench) | 97.1% ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning (LiveBench) | 92.2% ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| LMArena Agent (LMArena) | 0.1382 ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| LMArena WebDev (LMArena) | 1815.4 ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| MirrorCode (Epoch AI run) | 77.4% ↗epoch run | not reported | — | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles (Epoch AI run) | 71% ↗epoch run | not reported | — | — |
| OSWorld 2.0 (partial) | 81.8% ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 (Epoch AI run) | 100% ↗epoch run | not reported | — | — |
| SAGE (Vals AI) | 45.8% ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 72.2% ↗epoch run | not reported | — | — |
| Terminal-Bench 4.0 | 66.4% ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| Terminal-Bench 4.0 (Vals AI) | 65.2% ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| Terminal-Bench Science 0.1 | 58.7% ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 (Andon Labs) | 9235.25 ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| Only Kimi K2 Thinking reports · 16 | ||||
| AIME25 (no tools) | not reported | 94.5% ↗ | — | — |
| BrowseComp (w/ tools) | not reported | 60.2% ↗ | — | — |
| BrowseComp-ZH (w/ tools) | not reported | 62.3% ↗ | — | — |
| GPQA (no tools) | not reported | 84.5% ↗ | — | — |
| HLE (Text-only) (no tools) | not reported | 23.9% ↗ | — | — |
| HLE (Text-only) (w/ tools) | not reported | 44.9% ↗ | — | — |
| HMMT25 (no tools) | not reported | 89.4% ↗ | — | — |
| IMO-AnswerBench (no tools) | not reported | 78.6% ↗ | — | — |
| LiveCodeBenchV6 (no tools) | not reported | 83.1% ↗ | — | — |
| MMLU-Pro (no tools) | not reported | 84.6% ↗ | — | — |
| Multi-SWE-bench (w/ tools) | not reported | 41.9% ↗ | — | — |
| SciCode (no tools) | not reported | 44.8% ↗ | — | — |
| SWE-bench Multilingual (w/ tools) | not reported | 61.1% ↗ | — | — |
| SWE-bench Verified (w/ tools) | not reported | 71.3% ↗ | — | — |
| Terminal-Bench (w/ simulated tools (JSON)) | not reported | 47.1% ↗ | — | — |
| WeirdML (Håvard Tveit Ihle) | not reported | 42.8% ↗ | — | — |
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 Claude Opus 5.5 minus Kimi K2 Thinking 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
Official pricing pages and model cards| Spec | Claude Opus 5.5 | Kimi K2 Thinking | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|
| Context window | 1M tokens | 256K tokens | Claude Opus 5.5 |
| Max output | 128K tokens | — | — |
| Input price / 1M | $4 ↗ | — | — |
| Output price / 1M | $20 ↗ | — | — |
| Cached input / 1M | $0.2 ↗ | — | — |
| Input + output / 1M Lower is cheaper. List prices; batch, tool and regional fees excluded. | $24 | — | — |
| Modalities | text · vision | text | Claude Opus 5.5 |
| Released | 2026-09-22 | 2025-11-06 | — |
| Cited benchmark scores | 34 | 17 | — |
Reliability
Provider status
Live from /statusMore matchups
Claude Opus 5.5 vs …
Models sharing the most benchmarksMore matchups
Kimi K2 Thinking vs …
Models sharing the most benchmarksBuilt by Respan
Which one wins on your data?
Public benchmarks are a starting point. Run Claude Opus 5.5 and Kimi K2 Thinking on your own prompts with Respan evals, or route to either through one gateway key with automatic failover.