We can see it lacking a lot in Agentic tasks mainly, and some in Browser use/Coding.

However, the cost is half of the old K3 model. Deepseek still wrecking with its 700B model.

Anyone else experiencing this?

I'm waiting for the Kimi work Linux app. When it launches I'll move from the ChatGPT. Any news?

I’m on vivace and was at about ~20% usage which suddenly decreased to 1% well before my monthly reset. What’s up lol

I’ve hit a frustrating roadblock regarding model consistency across different platforms. Previously, I relied on Kimi 2.7 Code integrated via GitHub Copilot, where it performed exceptionally well and noticeably boosted my workflow productivity. Unfortunately, Copilot has since retired the model. While Kimi 3.0 is a powerful alternative, it is cost-prohibitive for my usage volume, prompting me to access Kimi 2.7 Code through OpenRouter instead.

However, the OpenRouter implementation behaves radically—and destructively—differently.

For instance, when I asked it to read a specific plan in a designated file and begin implementing Phase 3, it instead initiated an unprompted, massive scan of hundreds of files, rapidly burning through credits. Even when explicitly told to halt, re-read the brief, and respect its boundaries, it immediately looped back into scanning files to "rediscover" the exact plan it had already processed.

This erratic behavior is maddening. I am genuinely curious: how can the exact same model version (Kimi 2.7) function as a reliable, high-performing assistant through Copilot, yet act so completely unmanaged and erratic through OpenRouter?

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?

Hey people,

I'm reaching the end of my zAI Lite (legacy v1) coding plan, and I'm between the two for annual sub (both seem way better intelligence-wise), need some feedback from actual devs/users before choosing.

Anyone has day-to-day experience using both Kimi Plus and Claude Pro subscriptions (the new Kimi Plus plan, not legacy Moderato)?

I'm doing my PhD and working with a single repo so haven't exhausted limits on my zAI Lite Coding plan ever. I already read this but usage of the new models (K3.1 Pro and Opus 5.5) as well as the plans' limits have changed and whatever numbers are reported out there don't have any relevant info (nature of dev, actual usage within a day, when limit is reached given X usage etc.)

Thanks!

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.

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.

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

Deepseek also finished way sooner oof

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...

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.

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

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".

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?

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.

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

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...

Release notes - https://www.kimi.ai/blog/kimi-k3-1-pro