Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Kimi K2.7-Code: open-source coding model with better token efficiency

huggingface.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 254 posts

Re: Kimi K2.7-Code: open-source coding model with better token efficiency

#111

Post by Bnjoroge »

kmike84 wrote: post #39
shreedx wrote: post #10

I would really love to know if anyone has any experience with something like opencode + Kimi K2.6/2.7 now compared to Claude Code. What is better, what is worse, what is the cost comparison. I am currently paying $100 for the 5x Max plan, but Fable is running through the usage limits quite drastically and I cannot really say it's night and day compared to Opus. Also, I use this mostly for my side projects, so the $10…

I do have this experience. I've used Claude Code (with Opus mostly), and then switched to opencode (mostly with Kimi 2.6) for my personal projects; it's based on a couple months of use. Claude Code is better. But Opencode + kimi 2.6 is workable, which is big. For bare code writing, if you know what exactly you want, most popular models are fine (deepseek, kimi, etc), it feels more or less the same as anthropic models…

This is generally been my experience as well, but i think the main reason for claude code being better at understanding intent is their massive system prompt.

Re: Kimi K2.7-Code: open-source coding model with better token efficiency

#112

Post by odiroot »

trollbridge wrote: post #32
shreedx wrote: post #10

I would really love to know if anyone has any experience with something like opencode + Kimi K2.6/2.7 now compared to Claude Code. What is better, what is worse, what is the cost comparison. I am currently paying $100 for the 5x Max plan, but Fable is running through the usage limits quite drastically and I cannot really say it's night and day compared to Opus. Also, I use this mostly for my side projects, so the $10…

I am extremely happy with ohmypi, but you could use OpenCode or just keep using Claude Code! DeepSeek-V4-Pro is adequate plus use DS4-Flash for tasks or other small activity you’d use Haiku or Sonnet for. Go sign up with $10 prepaid. OpenCode Go - go sign up with $5 for a month and use Qwen-3.7-Max for design/plan/architecture or difficult troubleshooting. Feels closer to Opus 3.6 or 3.7 than DeepSeek, closest I’ve f…

> I am extremely happy with ohmypi, but you could use OpenCode or just keep using Claude Code!

What's the benefit of using OMP over OpenCode?

Just the sheer amount of options in OMP overwhelmed me. But I also use both via ACP in Zed so the CLI itself doesn't matter much.

Re: Kimi K2.7-Code: open-source coding model with better token efficiency

#113

Post by Bnjoroge »

re-thc wrote: post #14
shreedx wrote: post #10

I would really love to know if anyone has any experience with something like opencode + Kimi K2.6/2.7 now compared to Claude Code. What is better, what is worse, what is the cost comparison. I am currently paying $100 for the 5x Max plan, but Fable is running through the usage limits quite drastically and I cannot really say it's night and day compared to Opus. Also, I use this mostly for my side projects, so the $10…

The Kimi problem is it doesn’t follow instructions and goes off track often. Other than that it’s pretty decent (for the price).

Yup. I’m hoping this variant fixes these issues.

Re: Kimi K2.7-Code: open-source coding model with better token efficiency

#114

Post by WarmWash »

deadbolt wrote: post #109
well_ackshually wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

yes, yes, the spectre of communism, BYD is the CCP, Alibaba is the CCP, stealing your children and eating them for Mao, bla bla bla. I have a feeling you'd be slightly salty at people saying "Google and Tesla are making CIA models"

Going by their response you appear to have been correct lol

I'm not salty, they are just confused about the difference between free enterprise capitalism and communism, which is understandable.

Re: Kimi K2.7-Code: open-source coding model with better token efficiency

#115

Post by upcoming-sesame »

trollbridge wrote: post #32
shreedx wrote: post #10

I would really love to know if anyone has any experience with something like opencode + Kimi K2.6/2.7 now compared to Claude Code. What is better, what is worse, what is the cost comparison. I am currently paying $100 for the 5x Max plan, but Fable is running through the usage limits quite drastically and I cannot really say it's night and day compared to Opus. Also, I use this mostly for my side projects, so the $10…

I am extremely happy with ohmypi, but you could use OpenCode or just keep using Claude Code! DeepSeek-V4-Pro is adequate plus use DS4-Flash for tasks or other small activity you’d use Haiku or Sonnet for. Go sign up with $10 prepaid. OpenCode Go - go sign up with $5 for a month and use Qwen-3.7-Max for design/plan/architecture or difficult troubleshooting. Feels closer to Opus 3.6 or 3.7 than DeepSeek, closest I’ve f…

Deepseek-V4-Flash-Free on Opencode is what I use most of the time, for simple tasks. Such a good model to give for free (assuming you're okay with harvesting your data)

Re: Kimi K2.7-Code: open-source coding model with better token efficiency

#116

Post by Bnjoroge »

DCKing wrote: post #27
yanis_t wrote: post #2

I was wondering how does Anthropic and likes keep competitive when Opus is ($5 / $25) 5x times more expensive compared to Kimi K2.6 ($0.7 / $3.4) or other Chinese models, while being only marginally better. My theory is that US enterprise just can't send data to Chinese and that's understandable, but is that "the moat"?

The moat right now is model performance and what that means for how many tokens and additional time you spend. I say this as a relatively frequent user of Kimi models and generally a big fan. But on not-yet-gamed benchmarks like DeepSWE, Kimi K2.6 is beaten soundly by Claude Sonnet 4.6 ($3 / $15) and even slightly by GPT 5.4 Mini ($0.75 / $4.50). There's no question Kimi models are very good for a lot of code tasks.…

I personally dont put any weight to DeepSWE. Other than 5.5 being directionally the best model, it gets the others pretty wrong in my experience. FrontierCode from cognition looks interesting

Re: Kimi K2.7-Code: open-source coding model with better token efficiency

#117

Post by vidarh »

varispeed wrote: post #68
schmorptron wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cursor's composer models are finetuned kimi

They are unusable (unless you want to deliberately destroy your codebase). So if Cursor's models are Kimi based, then well. I'll skip them altogether.

Kimi works great in their CLI, but their CLI has a number of workarounds for quirks of their models, including detecting when the model gets into a loop, and reverting to a checkpoint but letting the model compose a "message" to its past self (search their CLI for "BackToTheFuture"...) It doesn't work so well in a harness that doesn't take those quirks into account.

Re: Kimi K2.7-Code: open-source coding model with better token efficiency

#118

Post by Bnjoroge »

khuey wrote: post #37
yanis_t wrote: post #2

I was wondering how does Anthropic and likes keep competitive when Opus is ($5 / $25) 5x times more expensive compared to Kimi K2.6 ($0.7 / $3.4) or other Chinese models, while being only marginally better. My theory is that US enterprise just can't send data to Chinese and that's understandable, but is that "the moat"?

I think most people who've tried them both would tell you Anthropic's models are more than marginally better than Kimi. Kimi and the other open source models may score well on SWE-bench or whatever but the gap is noticeable IMHO once you actually try to use them.

It depends on what your task is and how precise your prompts are. Planning with fable or 4.8 and laying out the plan in step by step process and coding with mimo v2.5 pro or dsv4pro or qwen 3.7 max and doing a final review with 5.5 has worked really well for me for infra stuff.

Re: Kimi K2.7-Code: open-source coding model with better token efficiency

#119

Post by Bnjoroge »

nullbio wrote: post #33
yanis_t wrote: post #2

I was wondering how does Anthropic and likes keep competitive when Opus is ($5 / $25) 5x times more expensive compared to Kimi K2.6 ($0.7 / $3.4) or other Chinese models, while being only marginally better. My theory is that US enterprise just can't send data to Chinese and that's understandable, but is that "the moat"?

I think none of them having a defacto and high quality English focused cli is a big part of it. None of the Chinese models I've tried have worked well in opensource cli's. Granted, I've only tried a few, but still...

huh? They all work great in omp/opencode unless you mean their own native clis like kimi code

Re: Kimi K2.7-Code: open-source coding model with better token efficiency

#120

Post by maherbeg »

htrp wrote: post #49
giancarlostoro wrote: post #40

Reading their modified license terms, it cracks me up, because they've basically remade the MIT to be the MIT + the one clause that the BSD used to have, which didn't care about MAU or revenue, if you used it in a product, they asked you to 'advertise' them basically. Honestly, its a reasonable request.

This is the cursor callout. Don't make us shame you into disclosure

Cursor had a specific licensing agreement that allowed them to brand it how they want.
Post reply on HN