Apertus 70B vs Hermes 2 Pro Llama 3 8B vs Kimi K2 Instruct 0905
Hermes 2 Pro Llama 3 8B comes out ahead, 51 to 38 and 32 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.
Swiss AI
Apertus 70B
32/100- ECI—
- Price$0.82 / $2.42
- Context66K
- Our pick
Nous ResearchHermes 2 Pro Llama 3 8B
51/100- ECI—
- Price$0.14 / $0.14
- Context8K
Moonshot AIKimi K2 Instruct 0905
38/100- ECI—
- Price$0.60 / $2.50
- Context262K
Hermes 2 Pro Llama 3 8B is our pick
Hermes 2 Pro Llama 3 8B is the better all-round choice, scoring 51/100 against Kimi K2 Instruct 0905 (38) and Apertus 70B (32). It leads on price. Kimi K2 Instruct 0905 wins on context window. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
- CapabilityNot enough dataNo independent benchmark covers every model here yet
- Lowest priceHermes 2 Pro Llama 3 8BHermes 2 Pro Llama 3 8B $0.14 · Kimi K2 Instruct 0905 $1.07 · Apertus 70B $1.22 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextKimi K2 Instruct 0905Kimi K2 Instruct 0905 262,144 · Apertus 70B 65,536 · Hermes 2 Pro Llama 3 8B 8,192 tokens
- Widest inputsSame inputsApertus 70B: Text · Hermes 2 Pro Llama 3 8B: Text · Kimi K2 Instruct 0905: Text
- Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
| Measure | Weight | Apertus 70B | Hermes 2 Pro Llama 3 8B | Kimi K2 Instruct 0905 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 44 | 87 | 46 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 25 | 25 | 25 |
| Context window | 20% | 12 | 0 | 37 |
| Overall | 100% | 32/100 | 51/100 | 38/100 |
Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | Apertus 70BSwiss AI | Hermes 2 Pro Llama 3 8BNous Research | Kimi K2 Instruct 0905Moonshot AI |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $0.82 | $0.14 (best) | $0.60 |
| Output | $2.42 | $0.14 (best) | $2.50 |
| Cached input | — | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $1.22 | $0.14 (best) | $1.07 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Median of 3 providers | Median of 2 providers | Median of 12 providers |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 65,536 tokens | 8,192 tokens | 262,144 tokens (best) |
| Max output | 8,192 tokens | 8,192 tokens | 98,304 tokens (best) |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | No | No |
| PDFs | No | No | No |
| Audio | No | No | No |
| Video | No | No | No |
| Reasoning | No | No | No |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | No | No |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | OpenApache-2.0 | OpenLlama 3 Community License | OpenModified MIT |
| API model ID | — | — | — |
| API providers | 3 | 2 | 13 (best) |
| Released | Sep 2, 2025 | Apr 30, 2024 | Sep 5, 2025 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Sep 2025 | — | — |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- Apertus 70B$13.04
- Hermes 2 Pro Llama 3 8B$1.68
- Kimi K2 Instruct 0905$11.00
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Apertus 70B, Hermes 2 Pro Llama 3 8B or Kimi K2 Instruct 0905?
Hermes 2 Pro Llama 3 8B is the better all-round choice, scoring 51/100 against Kimi K2 Instruct 0905 (38) and Apertus 70B (32). It leads on price. Kimi K2 Instruct 0905 wins on context window. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
Which is cheaper, Apertus 70B, Hermes 2 Pro Llama 3 8B or Kimi K2 Instruct 0905?
Hermes 2 Pro Llama 3 8B is cheaper at $0.14 input / $0.14 output per million tokens (median across 2 API providers). Kimi K2 Instruct 0905 costs $0.60 input / $2.50 output per million tokens (median across 12 API providers); Apertus 70B costs $0.82 input / $2.42 output per million tokens (median across 3 API providers). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.14 per million tokens for Hermes 2 Pro Llama 3 8B versus $1.07 for Kimi K2 Instruct 0905 (7.7× as much) and $1.22 for Apertus 70B (8.7× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Apertus 70B has not been scored yet, Hermes 2 Pro Llama 3 8B has not been scored yet and Kimi K2 Instruct 0905 has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Apertus 70B, Hermes 2 Pro Llama 3 8B and Kimi K2 Instruct 0905 yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. All three support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
Kimi K2 Instruct 0905 has the largest context window at 262,144 tokens, against 65,536 for Apertus 70B and 8,192 for Hermes 2 Pro Llama 3 8B. Maximum output per response: Apertus 70B up to 8,192, Hermes 2 Pro Llama 3 8B up to 8,192, Kimi K2 Instruct 0905 up to 98,304 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Apertus 70B accepts text; Hermes 2 Pro Llama 3 8B accepts text; Kimi K2 Instruct 0905 accepts text. They handle the same number of input types.
Are any of these open source?
Yes, all three publish their weights (Apache-2.0, Llama 3 Community License and Modified MIT), so you can self-host them.
Which is newer?
Kimi K2 Instruct 0905 is the newest, released Sep 5, 2025. Apertus 70B came out Sep 2, 2025; Hermes 2 Pro Llama 3 8B came out Apr 30, 2024. Knowledge cutoff: Apertus 70B Sep 2025.
How do you decide the winner?
Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Nov 2, 2026.
