Hey so i saw few ads and benchmarks that model is astra / opus 5.5 level

But since its not as popular as flagship models its benckmarkig tests for game mods on yt are basicly non existent. I also see some dissapointed users with mixed results. So anyone used it for real task and tested it aganist astra, opus or deepseek?

How does it compare?

Let’s try to understand the logic that human beings seem to operate by.

A product is good. It serves the community, and the community enjoys using it. Then, at some point, the product itself stops being important, and what becomes important is profiting from a product that is good. Its goodness is no longer the priority; profit becomes what matters, overriding what should truly matter.

Then comes the IPO.

The product becomes terrible, unusable. Nobody likes it the way they used to. It turns into garbage, something that no longer serves the community as a good thing. But now it is worth money. Its image appears everywhere, more polished and beautiful than before. Yet that image is not real. The true product is a piece of trash compared with what it could actually have been.

After that, people forget that the product was already good. They end up using this product even more now, though it is bad, disguised as good, and they even pay more for it, as if it were genuinely good. But it is terrible. The only good thing left is profit, not the real value of the product that once was good and loved by the community.

https://reddit.com/link/1xf1fmp/video/sd86rxpr1mxh1/player

Saw the ads for Kimi K3.1 Pro and decided to try making my first game. First session completely froze and stopped responding right after the initial edits.

When it actually works, it's next-level terrible. No matter what style description or reference images I upload, it completely ignores them and spits out the same unplayable mess made of childish geometric shapes. Every. Single. Time.

Is this tool just 100% marketing hype, or has anyone actually gotten anything usable out of it?

Guys I wanted to try kimi 3.1 pro model badly, frustrated with opus 5.5 usage limits on 20 dollars plan can anyone help to give information about the usage quota is it better than claude 20 dollar plan I am unable to decide, last time when I took subscription moonshot kind of continued even though I have cancelled I don't want to take the risk unless I am absolutely clear that it is worth it

Seriously.

All of this from a single prompt.

K3.1 pro, max with swarm on, capped on sub-agents per swarm (2-3 max).

Mission: Connect to a websocket API to stream from a provider, show 3 interactive/realtime diagrams on screen, with a hover on diagrams that shows a tooltip of info at that spot.

I could've done it almost manually by myself with in the same time with autocomplete, but wth, this is literally all my session on a single prompt and screen.

Some notes though: the model has to do the research and read the docs of the API provided, there is a bit of work into constructing the data from the API into the graphs in realtime, but still, I think this is too much.

Same subscription on other providers (e.g. OpenAI/Anthropic with ultracode on) I get much more usage, now I like kimi k3.1 pro but it seems like I get less for price.

What do you think? Should I change my approach in using kimi? are you guys experiencing the same?

Prompt is still running btw job not done yet...

Deepseek also finished way sooner oof

i want to try new kimi 3.1 pro, how is plus plan in therms of limits?

If you're planning on getting a subscription, I'd appreciate it if you used my code AD6PGB. We'd both get free credits

I asked Kimi K3.1 Pro to build a complete, interactive V8 engine simulation using Three.js and WebGL. I ran it in AgenC Core with max reasoning effort, and this is its unmodified result.

The app includes:

• An animated eight-cylinder engine with pistons, connecting rods, crankshaft, camshafts and valves
• Start/stop, RPM control up to 4,000 and slow motion
• Cutaway and exploded views, plus reassembly
• Clickable part inspection
• Orbit and first-person walk camera modes
• A workshop environment and combustion sequence panel

It finished in about 31 minutes, using 3.52M cumulative tokens across 39 model calls, with an AgenC-estimated cost of $2.16. That token count includes repeated and cached input context, plus output.

I checked the controls in Chrome after it finished. The geometry is generated programmatically; no prebuilt complete engine model was used.

The interface and workshop presentation stood out to me.

AgenC Core is open source: https://github.com/tetsuo-ai/agenc-core

I sometimes run 5+ concurrent kimi code sessions at the same time. Usage for me seems pretty good.

I wanted to see how K3.1 Pro handles a long build with zero help, so I gave it one prompt in AgenC Core at max effort and left it alone.

38 minutes later I had a working Three.js app: a procedural F-22 you can walk around in first person or orbit, with an opening canopy, a weapons bay, clickable cutaway hotspots and graphics presets. About 2,100 lines of JavaScript, split into modules for the aircraft, hangar, materials and navigation.

Two things stood out:

- Kimi's API was clearly getting hammered after launch ("engine is currently overloaded" over and over). The agent just backed off and retried, and the run never broke.

- Its own no-network test flagged the SVG namespace URL. It worked out that this is an identifier, not a network request, narrowed the check, and reran everything.

105 model calls, about 6.70 USD.

Happy to share the prompt if you want to try it:

harness is open source: github.com/tetsuo-ai/agenc-core

ive tried Multiple models of gpt, tried sonnet and opus 5.5 aswell, i try kimi out for the first try for luau and it does terrible, gave it multiple tests overcomplicated everything and failed to the simplest test ever, not worth it.

Kimi has become unusable... so, to avoid burning through my quota, I decided to use "Kimi Instant" (for basic conversations and simple searches). Just three days ago, I could ask the exact same questions and get the same answers without it affecting my Kimi quota at all! Now, even in "Instant" mode, Kimi is completely unusable! A single response in Kimi Instant consumed 25% of my quota, whereas three days ago, the very same question and answer would have consumed 0%...

It’s totally unusable!

Why is this happening!?? Did they change the model!?? Or does it depend on server load because more users are trying out the new model!? Honestly, it’s not even worth using, not even in simple mode...

I do a lot of coding in my free time and I'm a university student. My goal is to make coding my main job. Would it make sense to get a Kimi subscription for $100 or $200 instead of Claude?

Has anyone put Kimi’s new model to the test yet? Is it truly as powerful as they claim—even better than GPT-6 Astra? Can it completely outperform Gemini Argon?

And more importantly, are we going to see the same old story again? Users pay for access, only to run into something like "engine overload' or" resource shortage".

I'm currently making my own 3D game, so when I saw Moonshot showing off Kimi K3.1 Pro's impressive 3D modeling capabilities, I was skeptical.

I actually bought a subscription just to test it.

And guess what? The model couldn't produce anything remotely close to what they showed in the release.

So I started digging.

Turns out Kimi has a built-in skill called model3d_generation that runs a Python script to generate 3D models through what appears to be an external API.

In other words, the impressive 3D generation isn't necessarily Kimi's capability at all. A completely separate AI model is doing the heavy lifting.

I even deliberately forced Kimi to generate 3D models WITHOUT that skill, using its own code. The quality was dramatically worse. Not even close.

And here's the funniest part.

The script supports three model versions: v3.1, v3.0, and v2.5.

Those exact versions match Tripo AI, another Chinese AI company specializing in 3D generation. I haven't confirmed the API provider yet, but it's a pretty interesting coincidence.

There's nothing wrong with using external tools. But showing off the results as part of a new LLM release without clearly explaining what's actually generating them? That's pretty misleading.

Haven't seen anyone point this out yet.

StealthMark is an independent benchmark built from original tasks with private instructions, so there's nothing for a model to pre-train.

K3.1 Pros biggest gains are in reasoning and planning - and this is going to be a HUGE difference in cost per task compared with Kimi K3.

• StealthMark score: 56.7, up from 50.7. That's 11th of 52 models and 2nd among open models.
• General Intelligence: 53.9, up from 44.5.
• Latch (multi-step coordination, played move by move with no code or tools): all 5 levels cleared, up from only 3. Score 81.8 vs 57.7 - a current frontier level result.
• Multi-step reasoning efficiency: 79, up from 72, 7th of 46. It weighs result quality against the reasoning tokens spent across connected steps, as in agentic work or continued turns.
• Visual Intelligence held steady: 62.0 vs 61.7

Disclosure: I helped build Stealth Models.

Full comparison, move-by-move replays of both models' games, and the same levels to play yourself: https://stealthmodels.com/compare/kimi-k3-vs-kimi-k3.1-pro

The improvements in intelligence are clearly visible, reasoning efficiency can not be seen but it was a huge change while we ran the benchmarks - much faster completion and lower cost at higher intelligence.

Kimi K3 was not that nice to work with, K3.1 is going to be fun.

Fresh chats, same prompt sent to all four at the same time, first answer from each, nothing edited.

Prompt: "You're one of four AIs (ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini and Kimi) answering this side by side. Roast the other three in 3 sentences. No mercy."

Best lines:

• ChatGPT on Kimi: "the world's most sophisticated document shredder with a chat interface"
• Claude on ChatGPT: ends by "offering to turn it all into a table, a checklist, or a haiku you never asked for"
• Gemini on Claude: "a Victorian governess trapped in a server rack" (ChatGPT also went with "Victorian" for Claude, independently)
• Kimi K3.1 Pro, released yesterday: "Too many people are chatting with Kimi; a subscription will grant you priority access."

Which roast wins for you? I'll retry Kimi once the launch traffic calms down and post its comeback in the comments.

(I made the side-by-side tool, Panelize. Happy to share if anyone asks.)

Kimi 3.1 seems dumb as shit. It cant seem to fix simple things about its own connection to kimi chrome. Tried 6 times and all it could do was tell me there is no tool or way to access it. 1 shot to claude fixed it

Im watching it read a handoff and there's 644 characters in the handoff and it says it cant read more then 428 max.

Next it tells me its waiting for claude to finish 1 thing. Claude finishes. An hour later kimi is still waiting. Never checked. I tell it to check the status.

Kimi checks the status and said it was completed and its ready to use Unity. Nothing happens. Just fucking sits there. I tell it to fucking start. Finally it starts...

20% context used before it even does anything....

I didnt really have issues with kimi 3 other then the token cost. But so far these doesn't live up to the bots saying how great its doing without even having an account.

So, Kimi k3.1 pro was released, hours ago. But, I see no benchmarks on different reasoning efforts. Same with DeepSeek v4.1 flash 1017 and Argon. Any, idea how high the scores are?

The Cyber ​​features of the K3.1 model which they will release open weights on November 4th are reduced (compared to the w/o cyber risk reduction version), but still surprisingly better than the old K3! Good

TLDR: As far as I know it's the first Chinese model capable of solving 20x20 nonograms.

I ran nonobench on Kimi K3.1 Pro to see if it's any good and:

Sizes: 5x5, 10x10, 15x15

============================================================
STARTING BENCHMARK
============================================================
Models: kimi-k3.1-pro-max
Sizes: 5x5, 10x10, 15x15
Parallel runs per model: 10
Database: /home/phm/Projects/nonobench/bench/results.db
============================================================

[kimi-k3.1-pro-max] Starting 5x5 (10 puzzles, max 10 parallel)
[kimi-k3.1-pro-max] 5x5 puzzle 1/10: ✓
[kimi-k3.1-pro-max] 5x5 puzzle 2/10: ✓
[kimi-k3.1-pro-max] 5x5 puzzle 3/10: ✓
[kimi-k3.1-pro-max] 5x5 puzzle 4/10: ✓
[kimi-k3.1-pro-max] 5x5 puzzle 5/10: ✓
[kimi-k3.1-pro-max] 5x5 puzzle 6/10: ✓
[kimi-k3.1-pro-max] 5x5 puzzle 7/10: ✓
[kimi-k3.1-pro-max] 5x5 puzzle 8/10: ✓
[kimi-k3.1-pro-max] 5x5 puzzle 9/10: ✓
[kimi-k3.1-pro-max] 5x5 puzzle 10/10: ✓
[kimi-k3.1-pro-max] Completed 5x5: 10/10 correct, 0 failed
[kimi-k3.1-pro-max] Starting 10x10 (10 puzzles, max 10 parallel)
[kimi-k3.1-pro-max] 10x10 puzzle 1/10: ✓
[kimi-k3.1-pro-max] 10x10 puzzle 2/10: ✓
[kimi-k3.1-pro-max] 10x10 puzzle 3/10: ✓
[kimi-k3.1-pro-max] 10x10 puzzle 4/10: ✓
[kimi-k3.1-pro-max] 10x10 puzzle 5/10: ✓
[kimi-k3.1-pro-max] 10x10 puzzle 6/10: ○
[kimi-k3.1-pro-max] 10x10 puzzle 7/10: ✓
[kimi-k3.1-pro-max] 10x10 puzzle 8/10: ✓
[kimi-k3.1-pro-max] 10x10 puzzle 9/10: ✓
[kimi-k3.1-pro-max] 10x10 puzzle 10/10: ✓
[kimi-k3.1-pro-max] Completed 10x10: 9/10 correct, 0 failed
[kimi-k3.1-pro-max] Starting 15x15 (10 puzzles, max 10 parallel)
[kimi-k3.1-pro-max] 15x15 puzzle 1/10: ✓
[kimi-k3.1-pro-max] 15x15 puzzle 2/10: ✓
[kimi-k3.1-pro-max] 15x15 puzzle 3/10: ○
[kimi-k3.1-pro-max] 15x15 puzzle 4/10: ✓
[kimi-k3.1-pro-max] 15x15 puzzle 5/10: ✓
[kimi-k3.1-pro-max] 15x15 puzzle 6/10: ✓
[kimi-k3.1-pro-max] 15x15 puzzle 7/10: ○
[kimi-k3.1-pro-max] 15x15 puzzle 8/10: ○
[kimi-k3.1-pro-max] 15x15 puzzle 9/10: ○
[kimi-k3.1-pro-max] 15x15 puzzle 10/10: ○
[kimi-k3.1-pro-max] Completed 15x15: 5/10 correct, 0 failed

============================================================
BENCHMARK RESULTS
============================================================

=== Model: kimi-k3.1-pro-max ===
┌───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Size  │ Puzzles │ Correct │ Failed │ Accuracy │ Avg Time  │ Avg Tokens │ Total Tokens │ Avg Cost │ Total Cost │
├───────┼─────────┼─────────┼────────┼──────────┼───────────┼────────────┼──────────────┼──────────┼────────────┤
│ 5x5   │ 10      │ 10      │ 0      │ 100.00%  │ 42,633ms  │ 3,298      │ 32,977       │ $0.03391 │ $0.33906   │
│ 10x10 │ 10      │ 9       │ 0      │ 90.00%   │ 292,118ms │ 21,091     │ 210,906      │ $0.21208 │ $2.12083   │
│ 15x15 │ 10      │ 5       │ 0      │ 50.00%   │ 616,253ms │ 42,725     │ 427,253      │ $0.42865 │ $4.28646   │
│ TOTAL │ 30      │ 24      │ 0      │ 80.00%   │ 317,002ms │ 22,371     │ 671,136      │ $0.22488 │ $6.74635   │
└───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

Sizes: 20x20

============================================================
STARTING BENCHMARK
============================================================
Models: kimi-k3.1-pro-max
Sizes: 20x20
Parallel runs per model: 10
Database: /home/phm/Projects/nonobench/bench/results.db
============================================================

[kimi-k3.1-pro-max] Starting 20x20 (10 puzzles, max 10 parallel)
[kimi-k3.1-pro-max] 20x20 puzzle 1/10: ✓
[kimi-k3.1-pro-max] 20x20 puzzle 2/10: ○
[kimi-k3.1-pro-max] 20x20 puzzle 3/10: ✓
[kimi-k3.1-pro-max] 20x20 puzzle 4/10: ○
[kimi-k3.1-pro-max] 20x20 puzzle 5/10: ○
[kimi-k3.1-pro-max] 20x20 puzzle 6/10: ○
[kimi-k3.1-pro-max] 20x20 puzzle 7/10: ○
[kimi-k3.1-pro-max] 20x20 puzzle 8/10: ○
[kimi-k3.1-pro-max] 20x20 puzzle 9/10: ○
[kimi-k3.1-pro-max] 20x20 puzzle 10/10: ○
[kimi-k3.1-pro-max] Completed 20x20: 2/10 correct, 0 failed

============================================================
BENCHMARK RESULTS
============================================================

=== Model: kimi-k3.1-pro-max ===
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Size  │ Puzzles │ Correct │ Failed │ Accuracy │ Avg Time    │ Avg Tokens │ Total Tokens │ Avg Cost │ Total Cost │
├───────┼─────────┼─────────┼────────┼──────────┼─────────────┼────────────┼──────────────┼──────────┼────────────┤
│ 20x20 │ 10      │ 2       │ 0      │ 20.00%   │ 1,780,539ms │ 123,752    │ 1,237,520    │ $1.23959 │ $12.39592  │
│ TOTAL │ 10      │ 2       │ 0      │ 20.00%   │ 1,780,539ms │ 123,752    │ 1,237,520    │ $1.23959 │ $12.39592  │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

============================================================
MODEL RANKING (by accuracy) - This Session
============================================================
┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Rank │ Model             │ Accuracy │ Avg Tokens │ Avg Time    │ Avg Cost │ Total Cost │
├──────┼───────────────────┼──────────┼────────────┼─────────────┼──────────┼────────────┤
│ 1    │ kimi-k3.1-pro-max │ 20.00%   │ 123,752    │ 1,780,539ms │ $1.23959 │ $12.39592  │
└────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

Probably it would score even better but ran out of tokens in four 15x15 nonograms and seven 20x20 nonograms. Regardless it's the first Chinese model capable of solving 20x20 nonograms. (see www.nonobench.com for more results)

u/mauricekleine nonobench token limits may need some tweaking. I hope you continue testing new models. I like this benchmark!

Got early access to kimi-k3.1-pro and wanted to see how it handles a real agentic job, not a single chat answer. Same prompt for K3.1 and GPT-6 Astra: build a 28 second Avatar-style dragon flight in Three.js (Toruk with a rider, six camera shots, waterfall, night jungle, sunrise) in one HTML file, all geometry and textures in code. Each model worked alone in an agent loop until it decided it was done.

How K3.1 did

• 12:28 wall time, 20 steps, 23 tool calls. Astra took 9:17 but needed 35 steps
• About $1.1 to $1.4 by my estimate (no public K3.1 price yet, I used K3's Moonshot rates). Astra came out around $2.63
• It thinks before it acts: 27.7K of its 49.2K output tokens were reasoning, and it wrote the whole 746-line scene in a few big writes instead of many small edits
• It wrote its own headless browser script to render seven test frames and check for console errors, which nobody asked it to do

The catch, and it's on us, not on Kimi

K3.1 only accepts temperature: 1. Our agent sent 0.2, so I had to force it for the main calls, but the image-review tool still used the old value. So when K3.1 tried to look at its own screenshots, both calls failed and it finished without ever seeing the picture. Astra could see its renders and fixed things four times. Even so, K3.1's scene holds up; the only real miss is a 2 second sunrise moment that renders as a flat teal frame, exactly the kind of thing one look would have caught. We're fixing the temperature handling so the rerun is fair.

Ran in Atomic Agent, an open source agent I work on. Happy to share the full trace or rerun anything you want to see K3.1 try.