11–20 of 31 posts
Additionally, I fully expect the frontier labs to continue increasing prices to meet the profit margins they need to to continue existing.
It feels like this "Kimi is a token hog" meme is 100% astroturfed by Anthropic. It's cheap. Believe your own eyes.
It feels like this "Kimi is a token hog" meme is 100% astroturfed by Anthropic. It's cheap. Believe your own eyes.
I mean at this point their very existence depends on it so I’m not sure if I’d be surprised
If you switch the view to "coding tasks" on this website:
Kimi K3: $3.18 per task
GLM 5.2: $6.51 per task
GPT 5.6 Sol: $7.02 per task
Opus 5: 8.23 per task
Fable: 11.70 per task
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I mean at this point their very existence depends on it so I’m not sure if I’d be surprised
Not to mention - If you switch the view to "coding tasks" on this website: Kimi K3: $3.18 per task GLM 5.2: $6.51 per task GPT 5.6 Sol: $7.02 per task Opus 5: 8.23 per task Fable: 11.70 per task So it's pretty dang cheap lol. Nobody is using frontier inference for "office tasks".
In my testing, I'm finding it more expensive than Opus 4.8/5 and GPT 5.6 Sol at API rates, because it chews so much. And, their plan (at least the $19 tier) is much less generous than the ChatGPT $20 plan, like an order of magnitude less, it's basically a demo not a useful amount of usage.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not to mention - If you switch the view to "coding tasks" on this website: Kimi K3: $3.18 per task GLM 5.2: $6.51 per task GPT 5.6 Sol: $7.02 per task Opus 5: 8.23 per task Fable: 11.70 per task So it's pretty dang cheap lol. Nobody is using frontier inference for "office tasks".
Right? The availability of this being in the article that’s pushing the opposite narrative is like…what?
K2.6 is cheaper than GLM5.2 (at least on DeepInfra) and I've found it works as good as Sonnet for my purposes. Both tend to think themselves into circles a bit and aren't super token efficient, but I've found GLM5.2 much worse on this count making K2.6 even cheaper than the per token price would make seem.
This article seems premature to post. Right now, the price is arbitrarily set by a single provider. Why wouldn't Moonshot collect extra revenue during this exclusivity period when they knew there would be hype? The model weights are supposed to release tomorrow. Over the next several weeks, I would expect competition among open weight providers to drive down the cost, as I've seen happen with other open weight model…
I don't mean to imply that Kimi is not at all cheaper than U.S frontier models. I more wrote this because I believe - since Chinese LLMs entered the public consciousness via DeepSeek R1, which was genuinely ~20x cheaper than o1 - there's a bit of a halo effect around Chinese models which causes people to overestimate the scale of the discount. And relative to that price anchor, Kimi is less extraordinarily cheap.
At the moment Kimi is ~10% cheaper than GPT-5.6 on the AA benchmark, and as you say that could go down to 20-30% cheaper (although I don't know how inference provider discounts play out on real world usage once you account for quantisation etc...). I'm not trying to suggest that that's nothing, but I do think some of the people driving the Chinese AI discourse would have a harder time pitching their conclusions if they were saying "this new Chinese model is 10% cheaper on some tasks, and it might get another 20% cheaper in the future".