ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Nov 2, 2026

Gemini 2.5 Flash vs Claude Haiku 4.5 vs Kimi K2 Instruct

Gemini 2.5 Flash comes out ahead, 66 to 57 and 50 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. Our pick

    Google

    Gemini 2.5 Flash

    Released Jun 17, 2025

    66/100
    • ECI140.6
    • Price$0.30 / $2.50
    • Context1.05M
    Full specs Remove Gemini 2.5 Flash

  2. Anthropic

    Claude Haiku 4.5

    Released Oct 15, 2025

    57/100
    • ECI142.2
    • Price$1.00 / $5.00
    • Context200K
    Full specs Remove Claude Haiku 4.5

  3. Moonshot AI

    Kimi K2 Instruct

    Released Jul 11, 2025

    50/100
    • ECI139.9
    • Price$0.57 / $2.30
    • Context131K
    Full specs Remove Kimi K2 Instruct
01 — Verdict

Gemini 2.5 Flash is our pick

Gemini 2.5 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 66/100 against Claude Haiku 4.5 (57) and Kimi K2 Instruct (50). It leads on price, inputs & features and context window. Claude Haiku 4.5 wins on capability. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityClaude Haiku 4.5Capabilities Index (ECI): Claude Haiku 4.5 142.2 · Gemini 2.5 Flash 140.6 · Kimi K2 Instruct 139.9
  • Lowest priceGemini 2.5 FlashGemini 2.5 Flash $0.85 · Kimi K2 Instruct $1.00 · Claude Haiku 4.5 $2.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextGemini 2.5 FlashGemini 2.5 Flash 1,048,576 · Claude Haiku 4.5 200,000 · Kimi K2 Instruct 131,072 tokens
  • Widest inputsGemini 2.5 FlashGemini 2.5 Flash: Text, Images, PDFs, Audio, Video · Claude Haiku 4.5: Text, Images, PDFs · Kimi K2 Instruct: Text
  • Self-hostingKimi K2 InstructPublishes downloadable weights (Modified MIT)
How the score is built
MeasureWeightGemini 2.5 FlashClaude Haiku 4.5Kimi K2 Instruct
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%656764
Price25%513448
Inputs & features15%1008025
Context window10%613225
Overall100%66/10057/10050/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

Gemini 2.5 Flash vs Claude Haiku 4.5 vs Kimi K2 Instruct specifications side by side
SpecificationGemini 2.5 FlashGoogleClaude Haiku 4.5AnthropicKimi K2 InstructMoonshot AI
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)140.6142.2 (best)139.9
ECI rank#110 of 165#102 of 165 (best)#112 of 165
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions—71.2%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics—66.7%—
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions—13.2%—
Price per million tokens
Input$0.30 (best)$1.00$0.57
Output$2.50$5.00$2.30 (best)
Cached input$0.03 (best)$0.10—
Blended (3:1)$0.85 (best)$2.00$1.00
Long-context rateSame rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceOfficial Google APIOfficial Anthropic APIMedian of 11 providers
Limits
Context window1,048,576 tokens (best)200,000 tokens131,072 tokens
Max output65,536 tokens (best)64,000 tokens32,768 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesYesYesNo
PDFsYesYesNo
AudioYesNoNo
VideoYesNoNo
ReasoningYesYesNo
Tool callingYesYesYes
Structured outputYesYesNo
Availability
WeightsProprietaryProprietaryOpenModified MIT
API model IDgemini-2.5-flashclaude-haiku-4-5—
API providers3248 (best)11
ReleasedJun 17, 2025Oct 15, 2025Jul 11, 2025
Knowledge cutoffJan 2025Feb 28, 2025—
03 — Cost

What would a month cost?

Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.

  • Gemini 2.5 Flash$8.00
  • Claude Haiku 4.5$20.00
  • Kimi K2 Instruct$10.30
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Gemini 2.5 Flash, Claude Haiku 4.5 or Kimi K2 Instruct?

Gemini 2.5 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 66/100 against Claude Haiku 4.5 (57) and Kimi K2 Instruct (50). It leads on price, inputs & features and context window. Claude Haiku 4.5 wins on capability. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, Gemini 2.5 Flash, Claude Haiku 4.5 or Kimi K2 Instruct?

Gemini 2.5 Flash is cheaper at $0.30 input / $2.50 output per million tokens (official Google API price). Kimi K2 Instruct costs $0.57 input / $2.30 output per million tokens (median across 11 API providers); Claude Haiku 4.5 costs $1.00 input / $5.00 output per million tokens (official Anthropic API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.85 per million tokens for Gemini 2.5 Flash versus $1.00 for Kimi K2 Instruct (1.2× as much) and $2.00 for Claude Haiku 4.5 (2.4× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

Claude Haiku 4.5 scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Claude Haiku 4.5 142.2 (#102 of 165), Gemini 2.5 Flash 140.6 (#110 of 165) and Kimi K2 Instruct 139.9 (#112 of 165). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (139.4–143.9 vs 138.4–142.1), so treat the gap as small.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Gemini 2.5 Flash, Claude Haiku 4.5 and Kimi K2 Instruct yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Claude Haiku 4.5 leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. All three support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Gemini 2.5 Flash has the largest context window at 1,048,576 tokens, against 200,000 for Claude Haiku 4.5 and 131,072 for Kimi K2 Instruct. Maximum output per response: Gemini 2.5 Flash up to 65,536, Claude Haiku 4.5 up to 64,000, Kimi K2 Instruct up to 32,768 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Gemini 2.5 Flash accepts text, images, PDFs, audio and video; Claude Haiku 4.5 accepts text, images and PDFs; Kimi K2 Instruct accepts text. Gemini 2.5 Flash handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Kimi K2 Instruct publishes its weights (Modified MIT) and can be self-hosted; Gemini 2.5 Flash and Claude Haiku 4.5 is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Claude Haiku 4.5 is the newest, released Oct 15, 2025. Kimi K2 Instruct came out Jul 11, 2025; Gemini 2.5 Flash came out Jun 17, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Gemini 2.5 Flash Jan 2025, Claude Haiku 4.5 Feb 28, 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.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons