ai-trend-notifier

$ diff claude-opus-5 kimi-k3

Claude Opus 5 vs Kimi K3

Anthropic and Moonshot AI, side by side. Every value below is the one recorded on the model’s own wiki page, with its citation — nothing is estimated.

What actually differs

Context window
Identical — both accept 1M tokens, so context length is not a reason to pick either.
Input price
Kimi K3 at $3/M against $5/M — 1.7× cheaper to feed. Standard rates: one of these labs also quotes a lower cached-input tier, which applies only when a prefix is reused — see the full spec below.
Output price
Kimi K3 at $15/M against $25/M — 1.7× cheaper to generate. Output dominates the bill on most agentic workloads, where the model writes far more than it reads.
Weights
Kimi K3 publishes weights (Modified MIT (commercial use permitted; weights publicly downloadable)); Claude Opus 5 is API-only. That decides self-hosting, air-gapped deployment and fine-tuning before any capability question does.
Recency
Claude Opus 5 shipped 8 days after Kimi K3 (2026-07-24 vs 2026-07-16).

Full spec

AttributeClaude Opus 5Kimi K3
DeveloperAnthropicMoonshot AI
Released2026-07-242026-07-16
Context window1M tokens1M tokens
Pricing$5/M input · $25/M output (standard); $10/M · $50/M (Fast mode, research preview)$0.30/M cache-hit input · $3.00/M cache-miss input · $15.00/M output
LicenseproprietaryModified MIT (commercial use permitted; weights publicly downloadable)
AvailabilityClaude.ai, API (`claude-opus-5`), Bedrock (`anthropic.claude-opus-53`), Vertex AI, Microsoft Foundry, Claude Code, CoworkKimi Code, Kimi app, Kimi API; weights on Hugging Face (`moonshot-ai/kimi-k3`, released 2026-07-27)

Values come from Claude Opus 5 and Kimi K3, where each is cited to its source. This page states no benchmark result and ranks neither model — it puts two published specifications next to each other. Where a lab has not published a figure, the row says so rather than guessing. How these pages are produced.

← all comparisons