Kimi K3.1 Pro vs Step 3.7 Flash
Moonshot AI · China | StepFun · China · Updated June 2026
Quick verdict
Pick Kimi K3.1 Pro for sparse moe with 2.8t total and about 104b active parameters, post-trained from the kimi k3 base or terminal-bench 4.0 of 65.7% (moonshot) and 67% as measured by artificial analysis. Pick Step 3.7 Flash for a 198b-parameter sparse moe vision-language model (11b active) built specifically for agentic coding and search workflows or scmp reported it 'outshines larger rivals' from deepseek and moonshot on some benchmarks despite its smaller active size. Choose Step 3.7 Flash if you need self-hosting or data privacy; Kimi K3.1 Pro if you want a managed API.
Kimi K3.1 Pro (Moonshot AI) and Step 3.7 Flash (StepFun) are two of the models people most often weigh against each other in 2026. Kimi K3.1 Pro is moonshot's October 23, 2026 post-training upgrade to Kimi K3 - a 2.8T-parameter MoE at $2/$10 with open weights promised by November 4. Step 3.7 Flash is stepFun's 198B MoE vision-language model built for coding and search agents - a distinct Chinese lab with genuinely competitive open weights. They diverge most on price, context window and open vs. closed weights — each quantified below from the models' real specs.
Key differences at a glance
- ▸Price: Step 3.7 Flash is about 10× cheaper on input ($0.2/$1.15 per 1M tokens vs $2/$10 per 1M tokens) — a large enough gap that at scale it can be the single biggest line item in the decision.
- ▸Context window: Kimi K3.1 Pro holds 4× more — 1M tokens (~1,573 pages) vs 256K (~393 pages). But effective recall usually fades long before the advertised ceiling, so the bigger number only helps if the model reasons over it.
- ▸Recency: Kimi K3.1 Pro is the newer model by about 5 months (released October 23, 2026), usually meaning fresher training data and capabilities.
Side-by-side specs
| Spec | Kimi K3.1 Pro | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Moonshot AI (China) | StepFun (China) |
| Released | October 23, 2026 | May 29, 2026 |
| Context window | 1M tokens (~1,573 pages) | 256K (~393 pages) |
| Price (in/out) | $2/$10 per 1M tokens | $0.2/$1.15 per 1M tokens |
| Open weight? | No — API only | Yes — self-hostable |
| Modalities | text, image, code | text, image, code |
| SWE-Bench Verified | Not published | Not published |
| MRCR v2 @ 1M | Not published | Not published |
Who wins what
Sparse MoE with 2.8T total and about 104B active parameters, post-trained from the Kimi K3 base
Kimi K3.1 Pro
Moonshot's October 23, 2026 post-training upgrade to Kimi K3 - a 2.8T-parameter MoE at $2/$10 with open weights promised by November 4 — and it carries the larger 1M tokens context.
Terminal-Bench 4.0 of 65.7% (Moonshot) and 67% as measured by Artificial Analysis
Kimi K3.1 Pro
Step 3.7 Flash is comparatively weak here — stepFun is a newer, less established lab than DeepSeek, Alibaba, or Moonshot
Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index of 55, second only to Claude Opus 5.5 (58) among the models AI Weekly lists
Kimi K3.1 Pro
Moonshot's October 23, 2026 post-training upgrade to Kimi K3 - a 2.8T-parameter MoE at $2/$10 with open weights promised by November 4 — and it is the newer of the two.
A 198B-parameter sparse MoE vision-language model (11B active) built specifically for agentic coding and search workflows
Step 3.7 Flash
StepFun's 198B MoE vision-language model built for coding and search agents - a distinct Chinese lab with genuinely competitive open weights — and it runs cheaper at $0.2/$1.15 per 1M tokens.
SCMP reported it 'outshines larger rivals' from DeepSeek and Moonshot on some benchmarks despite its smaller active size
Step 3.7 Flash
Kimi K3.1 Pro is comparatively weak here — most benchmarks are internal or use differing harnesses; no SWE-bench Verified figure published
Open weights (Apache 2.0) at a low per-token price
Step 3.7 Flash
At $0.2/$1.15 per 1M tokens it undercuts Kimi K3.1 Pro ($2/$10 per 1M tokens), and that gap compounds at volume.
Lowest cost at scale
Step 3.7 Flash
At $0.2/$1.15 per 1M tokens, it is the cheaper of the two — the gap dominates the bill on high-volume workloads.
Largest single-prompt input
Kimi K3.1 Pro
Its 1M tokens window is about 4× larger than Step 3.7 Flash's 256K, fitting roughly 1,573 pages in one prompt.
Which should you pick?
A cost-sensitive startup shipping high volume
→ Step 3.7 Flash
At $0.2/$1.15 per 1M tokens it undercuts Kimi K3.1 Pro, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.
Someone analysing very long documents or codebases
→ Kimi K3.1 Pro
Larger 1M tokens window fits more in one prompt.
A team with data-privacy or self-hosting needs
→ Step 3.7 Flash
Open weights let you run it on your own hardware; Kimi K3.1 Pro is API-only.
Anyone whose priority is sparse moe with 2.8t total and about 104b active parameters, post-trained from the kimi k3 base
→ Kimi K3.1 Pro
It is specifically built for that.
Anyone whose priority is a 198b-parameter sparse moe vision-language model (11b active) built specifically for agentic coding and search workflows
→ Step 3.7 Flash
That is its strongest area.
Kimi K3.1 Pro: where it fits
Moonshot's October 23, 2026 post-training upgrade to Kimi K3 - a 2.8T-parameter MoE at $2/$10 with open weights promised by November 4. Released October 23, 2026 by Moonshot AI, it is built for sparse MoE with 2.8T total and about 104B active parameters, post-trained from the Kimi K3 base, terminal-Bench 4.0 of 65.7% (Moonshot) and 67% as measured by Artificial Analysis, artificial Analysis Intelligence Index of 55, second only to Claude Opus 5.5 (58) among the models AI Weekly lists, and standard API price cut by a third versus K3 to $2/$10 per million tokens (Highspeed tier $4/$20).
Its trade-offs are real: weights promised by November 4, 2026 and not confirmed public as of November 3; license terms not yet disclosed, very high output-token use: roughly 150M output tokens across the Artificial Analysis index, self-hosting is impractical - about 1.4 TB of raw weights even at 4-bit, and most benchmarks are internal or use differing harnesses; no SWE-bench Verified figure published. At $2 in / $10 out per million tokens, it sits in the mid price band.
Step 3.7 Flash: where it fits
StepFun's 198B MoE vision-language model built for coding and search agents - a distinct Chinese lab with genuinely competitive open weights. Released May 29, 2026 by StepFun, it is built for a 198B-parameter sparse MoE vision-language model (11B active) built specifically for agentic coding and search workflows, sCMP reported it 'outshines larger rivals' from DeepSeek and Moonshot on some benchmarks despite its smaller active size, open weights (Apache 2.0) at a low per-token price, and includes a 1.8B vision encoder for image understanding alongside text.
Its trade-offs: stepFun is a newer, less established lab than DeepSeek, Alibaba, or Moonshot, benchmark 'outshines rivals' claims are from press coverage of specific tests, not a full independent leaderboard sweep, and smaller ecosystem and less third-party documentation than the more established Chinese labs. At $0.2 in / $1.15 out per million tokens, it sits in the budget price band.
The bottom line for this matchup
The defining split here is open vs. closed. Step 3.7 Flash gives you weights you control — self-host it, fine-tune it, keep data in-house, pay only for hardware. Kimi K3.1 Pro gives you a managed, always-updated API with no infrastructure to run. Teams with GPUs, privacy requirements, or huge volume often favour the open model; teams that want zero ops and the latest capabilities favour the closed one. Capability is close enough that this operational question, not the benchmark, usually decides it.
Want both Kimi K3.1 Pro and Step 3.7 Flash without two subscriptions? LumiChats gives you these plus 40+ models under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day) — draft with one, cross-check with the other.
See pricingFrequently asked questions
Is Kimi K3.1 Pro or Step 3.7 Flash better for coding?
Public SWE-Bench figures are not available for either model, so the honest test is your own repository — run an identical real bug through both. By design, Kimi K3.1 Pro leans toward sparse moe with 2.8t total and about 104b active parameters, post-trained from the kimi k3 base while Step 3.7 Flash leans toward a 198b-parameter sparse moe vision-language model (11b active) built specifically for agentic coding and search workflows, and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.
Which is cheaper, Kimi K3.1 Pro or Step 3.7 Flash?
Step 3.7 Flash is open-weight, so self-hosting means no per-token fee (you pay for hardware instead), while Kimi K3.1 Pro is API-metered at $2/$10 per 1M tokens. For most teams without GPUs, the API model is cheaper to start; at very high volume, self-hosting can win.
Which has the bigger context window?
Kimi K3.1 Pro — 1M tokens vs 256K, about 4× larger. Useful only if the model actually reasons over the full window, which not all do.
Can I use both Kimi K3.1 Pro and Step 3.7 Flash together?
Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you Kimi K3.1 Pro, Step 3.7 Flash and 40+ others under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day), so you can draft with one and cross-check with the other instead of buying two subscriptions.
Which is newer, Kimi K3.1 Pro or Step 3.7 Flash?
Kimi K3.1 Pro — released October 23, 2026, about 5 months after Step 3.7 Flash.
Related comparisons
Specifications and benchmarks reflect publicly reported figures as of June 2026 and may change as providers release updates. Always verify on your own workload.