ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Claude Opus 4.1 vs Kimi K2.7 Code

Kimi K2.7 Code comes out ahead, 64 to 49 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. Anthropic

    Claude Opus 4.1

    Released Aug 5, 2025

    49/100
    • ECI144.1
    • Price$15.00 / $75.00
    • Context200K
    Full specs Remove Claude Opus 4.1
  2. Our pick

    Moonshot AI

    Kimi K2.7 Code

    Released Jun 12, 2026

    64/100
    • ECI150.0
    • Price$0.95 / $4.00
    • Context262K
    Full specs Remove Kimi K2.7 Code

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

Kimi K2.7 Code is our pick

Kimi K2.7 Code is the better all-round choice, scoring 64/100 against Claude Opus 4.1 (49). It leads on capability, price, inputs & features and context window. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityKimi K2.7 CodeCapabilities Index (ECI): Kimi K2.7 Code 150.0 · Claude Opus 4.1 144.1
  • Lowest priceKimi K2.7 CodeKimi K2.7 Code $1.71 · Claude Opus 4.1 $30.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextKimi K2.7 CodeKimi K2.7 Code 262,144 · Claude Opus 4.1 200,000 tokens
  • Widest inputsSame inputsClaude Opus 4.1: Text, Images, PDFs · Kimi K2.7 Code: Text, Images, Video
  • Self-hostingKimi K2.7 CodePublishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightClaude Opus 4.1Kimi K2.7 Code
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%7178
Price25%039
Inputs & features15%7080
Context window10%3237
Overall100%49/10064/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

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

Claude Opus 4.1 vs Kimi K2.7 Code specifications side by side
SpecificationClaude Opus 4.1AnthropicKimi K2.7 CodeMoonshot AI
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)144.1150.0 (best)
ECI rank#81 of 148#49 of 148 (best)
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions77.3%87.9% (best)
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics12.6%54.0% (best)
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics68.9%95.6% (best)
SWE-bench VerifiedFixing real GitHub issues73.4%—
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions—36.5%
Price per million tokens
Input$15.00$0.95 (best)
Output$75.00$4.00 (best)
Cached input—$0.19
Blended (3:1)$30.00$1.71 (best)
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceMedian of 14 providersOfficial Moonshot AI API
Limits
Context window200,000 tokens262,144 tokens (best)
Max output32,000 tokens262,144 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesYesYes
PDFsYesNo
AudioNoNo
VideoNoYes
ReasoningYesYes
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputNoYes
Availability
WeightsProprietaryOpen
API model ID—kimi-k2.7-code
API providers1451 (best)
ReleasedAug 5, 2025Jun 12, 2026
Knowledge cutoffMar 31, 2025Jan 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.

  • Claude Opus 4.1$300.00
  • Kimi K2.7 Code$17.50
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Claude Opus 4.1 or Kimi K2.7 Code?

Kimi K2.7 Code is the better all-round choice, scoring 64/100 against Claude Opus 4.1 (49). It leads on capability, price, inputs & features and context window. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.1 or Kimi K2.7 Code?

Kimi K2.7 Code is cheaper at $0.95 input / $4.00 output per million tokens (official Moonshot AI API price). Claude Opus 4.1 costs $15.00 input / $75.00 output per million tokens (median across 14 API providers). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $1.71 per million tokens for Kimi K2.7 Code versus $30.00 for Claude Opus 4.1 (18× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

Kimi K2.7 Code scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Kimi K2.7 Code 150.0 (#49 of 148) and Claude Opus 4.1 144.1 (#81 of 148). Their confidence ranges do not overlap (148.1–151.8 vs 141.6–146.0), so the gap is a real one. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — Kimi K2.7 Code 87.9%, Claude Opus 4.1 77.3%; FrontierMath Tiers 1–3 — Kimi K2.7 Code 54.0%, Claude Opus 4.1 12.6%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — Kimi K2.7 Code 95.6%, Claude Opus 4.1 68.9%.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Kimi K2.7 Code yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Kimi K2.7 Code leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Kimi K2.7 Code has the largest context window at 262,144 tokens, against 200,000 for Claude Opus 4.1. Maximum output per response: Claude Opus 4.1 up to 32,000, Kimi K2.7 Code up to 262,144 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Claude Opus 4.1 accepts text, images and PDFs; Kimi K2.7 Code accepts text, images and video. They handle the same number of input types.

Are any of these open source?

Kimi K2.7 Code publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Claude Opus 4.1 is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Kimi K2.7 Code is the newest, released Jun 12, 2026. Claude Opus 4.1 came out Aug 5, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Claude Opus 4.1 Mar 31, 2025, Kimi K2.7 Code Jan 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 Oct 4, 2026.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons