Developers and technical teams are facing a new dilemma: if Kimi K2 Thinking can rival or surpass ChatGPT-class models like GPT-4 and GPT-5 (High) at a fraction of the training and usage cost, how should they rebalance their stack? The rapid rise of Kimi K2 Thinking, reportedly trained for far less than both GPT-4 and DeepSeek V3, forces hard questions about value, performance, and long-term dependence on closed APIs.
This article addresses those questions along several concrete dimensions that matter in real workflows. It compares Kimi K2 Thinking and ChatGPT (including GPT-5 (High) and GPT-5.1) on coding benchmarks, multi-turn dialogue stability, multimodal capabilities, hallucination behavior, ecosystem maturity, and local-deployment options. It then distills how to allocate tasks between the two models, how to transition from ChatGPT to Kimi K2 Thinking or run them together, and what Kimi’s trajectory implies for the long-term competitive position of ChatGPT.
A CNBC report on the training cost of Kimi K2 Thinking hit the industry like a boulder dropped into water. At 4.6 million USD, it is less than 8% of GPT-4’s training cost and even lower than the 5.6 million USD training cost (rental price, formal training phase) disclosed for DeepSeek V3.
Which Performs Better on Coding: Kimi or ChatGPT?
Category
Benchmark
Kimi K2 Thinking
GPT-5 (High)
Coding Tasks
SWE-bench Verified
71.3
74.9
SWE-bench Multilingual
61.1
55.3
Multi-SWE-bench
41.9
39.3
SciCode
44.8
42.9
LiveCodeBench V6
83.1
87.0
OJ-Bench (cpp)
48.7
56.2
Terminal-Bench
47.1
43.8
Kimi K2 Thinking and GPT-5 (High) do not show a simple strength–weakness hierarchy. Their gap is structural rather than absolute. Kimi performs better in multilingual environments, terminal-style interactions, and tasks requiring stable procedural reasoning. GPT-5 retains its advantage in complex code generation, compiler-level consistency, and high-difficulty semantic control driven by scale.
If the primary use case is code generation, troubleshooting, or agent-like automation in software projects, Kimi K2 is at least as good as, if not better than, ChatGPT. ChatGPT remains highly capable, especially for well-defined coding problems or when an explanation of the solution is needed, but Kimi’s focused optimizations give it an edge in pure coding efficiency.
Moreover, Kimi’s cost-effectiveness (open-source or low API costs) allows developers to run large coding jobs or continuous integration-style checks much more affordably than using the ChatGPT.
Which Performs Better on Multi-Turn Dialogue: Kimi or ChatGPT?
Kimi-K2 Thinking was built as a “thinking agent” that interleaves step-by-step chain-of-thought reasoning with dynamic function/tool calls. Unlike typical models that may drift or lose coherence after a few tool uses, Kimi-K2 maintains stable goal-directed behavior across 200–300 sequential tool invocations without human intervention. This is a major leap: prior open models tended to degrade after 30–50 steps. In other words, Kimi-K2 can handle hundreds of execute steps in one session while staying on track to solve complex problems.
Notably, the recent GPT-5.1 update focused on making the AI’s personality warmer and more engaging, so it feels “more like a friend” in conversation. This means ChatGPT is adept at handling follow-up questions, clarifying user intent, and staying on track without veering into irrelevancies. It also strictly adheres to user instructions (like speaking in a certain style or word limit) more reliably than before.
In short, for general conversational quality, ChatGPT’s ecosystem has a maturity and polish that comes from millions of real-world user interactions. It displays very “polished conversational abilities and reliability” thanks to OpenAI’s fine-tuning.
In summary – dialogue: For an interactive, evolving conversation (think of a chatty assistant or brainstorming partner), ChatGPT feels more naturally conversational and user-friendly. It’s forgiving with users, injects polite acknowledgments, and can handle even vague user prompts gracefully. Kimi K2 can certainly hold multi-turn conversations and rigorously maintain context (even more context in fact), but its style is more straightforward and “all-business.”
Which Performs Better on Multimodal Tasks: Kimi or ChatGPT?
ChatGPT (GPT-4/GPT-5) has a significant advantage in multimodal capabilities. GPT-4 introduced image understanding (allowing the model to analyze and comment on images), and GPT-5 extended this to what OpenAI calls “full-spectrum multimodal” – handling text, images, audio, and even video within one model. In practice, this means ChatGPT can accept an image as part of the prompt and produce a coherent analysis.
Kimi K2, as of its current release, is not multimodal. It is primarily a text-based LLM (albeit one that can work with natural language and programming language text).
It’s worth noting that Kimi’s strength lies in text-based tool use. It can call external tools via text (e.g., perform web searches, run code, query databases) and hence indirectly handle tasks like retrieving an image’s description by calling an OCR API, etc. But this is a workaround and requires setting up those tools; out-of-the-box, Kimi doesn’t “see” or “hear”, it only reads text.
Category
Benchmark
Kimi K2 Thinking
GPT-5 (High)
Agentic Search
BrowseComp
60.2
54.9
BrowseComp-ZH
62.3
63.0
Seal-0
56.3
51.4
FinSearchComp-T3
47.4
48.5
Frames
87.0
86.0
Kimi leans toward procedural stability. It handles open-ended search, multi-page reasoning, and stepwise information integration with lower error accumulation and more linear execution paths. Its advantages in BrowseComp, Seal-0, and Frames reflect this structure.
GPT-5 leans toward flexible exploration. It performs better when tasks involve complex structures, uncertain objectives, financial retrieval, or autonomous strategy switching. Its advantages in BrowseComp-ZH and FinSearchComp-T3 come from broader decision branching and higher exploratory range.
Does Kimi Make More Unfounded Assumptions than ChatGPT?
One critical aspect of AI assistants is whether they make unfounded assumptions or hallucinations – in other words, stating things as fact without evidence.
OpenAI has prioritized accuracy and reliability in GPT-5, achieving “massive accuracy gains”:
gpt-5-main demonstrates 44% fewer factual errors compared to GPT-4o.
gpt-5-thinking shows an even more impressive 78% reduction in factual errors against o3.
Some early users have documented that Kimi will “fill in the blanks”. But Now, Kimi K2’s developers have likely incorporated some alignment techniques (they did fine-tune an Instruct model with RLHF). Kimi does have an internal chain-of-thought for reasoning and can use tools to fact-check (if explicitly prompted in Thinking mode).
Example Prompt (user): “Estimate the total addressable market (TAM) for electric scooters in Southeast Asia by 2030.” Model response might include:
Then the model might call a web-search tool to fetch data, parse a table, compute projections.
reasoning_content might show something like: “Found: 2024 SEA scooter market size = US$2.1 billion. Penetration growth rate = 12 % CAGR (2019-24). Projecting to 2030 => US$2.1*(1.12)^(6) ≈ US$4.2 billion. Considering battery upgrades and ride-share adoption adds factor ×1.5 => ~US$6.3 billion. Cross-checked against ReportX estimating US$5 billion in 2030 — my estimate slightly higher due to ride-share multiplier. Final TAM ≈ US$6 billion.”
Final answer: “Based on the above reasoning I estimate a TAM of ≈ US$6 billion by 2030 for electric scooters in Southeast Asia.”
Is ChatGPT’s Ecosystem More Mature than Kimi’s?
1. Ecosystem maturity ChatGPT has a far more developed ecosystem, with well-documented APIs, an official plugin system, extensive SDKs, and a large community that produces tutorials, tools, and best practices. Its enterprise offerings also include compliance certifications, dedicated support, and reliable infrastructure.
2. Kimi’s ecosystem status Kimi’s ecosystem is newer and still expanding. It benefits from open-source availability and an active community, but it lacks the breadth of integrations and enterprise-grade tooling. While adoption is growing, its infrastructure and global support are not yet at the scale of OpenAI’s.
3. Plugin and integration capability ChatGPT provides mature plugin support, function-calling, and out-of-the-box integrations for connecting to external services. Kimi can use tools through prompting, but it does not offer a formal plugin platform, so developers must build their own agent loops if they want similar functionality.
What Advantages Does Kimi have in Local Deployment Compared to ChatGPT?
1. Full offline operation Kimi can run entirely on local hardware because its weights are open-source. It supports complete offline use in secure or isolated environments, something ChatGPT cannot provide because its models are only accessible through OpenAI’s servers.
2. Local data control On-premises deployment keeps all sensitive data inside an organization’s own systems. Industries with strict privacy rules can use Kimi without sending information to an external provider, unlike ChatGPT which always involves external data transit.
3. Customization freedom Local hosting allows fine-tuning, system-level integration, and modification of inference settings. Developers can adjust engines, quantization, or model behavior directly. ChatGPT remains a closed, fixed service with far less flexibility.
4. Cost advantages at scale Heavy workloads can be cheaper when self-hosting Kimi, since cost is tied to hardware rather than API fees. Analyses show Kimi’s API is already cheaper than GPT-5, and running it locally could reduce costs even further for large-volume users.
5. Transparent reasoning Kimi exposes a reasoning trace through its API, enabling inspection of intermediate steps. When self-hosted, this transparency becomes fully accessible. ChatGPT does not reveal chain-of-thought, making its reasoning harder to audit.
6. Flexible deployment options Kimi can be deployed on local servers, private clouds, or high-end workstations. Quantized versions run on multi-GPU setups without specialized supercomputers. ChatGPT’s models cannot be deployed privately at all.
7. No provider limits when self-hosted Local deployment removes rate limits, provider restrictions, or forced content filters. Developers can define their own policies and model behavior, enabling use cases that would be blocked under OpenAI’s controlled environment.
How Should Users Transition From ChatGPT to Kimi or Use Both？
Task separation up front Begin by distinguishing which tasks belong to which model. Treat the transition as an allocation exercise, not a full replacement.
1. Identify strengths Map your tasks to the model that performs them best. Kimi may excel at coding, long reasoning, and tool-driven workflows; ChatGPT may be stronger for creative writing, casual Q&A, or multimodal tasks. Assign each task to the better model to improve results and reduce costs.
2. Gradual testing Run small trials of Kimi on your usual workload. Note output differences and adjust prompts or temperature as needed. Start with low-risk tasks and expand once performance is predictable.
3. Use community tools Leverage multi-model interfaces that let you switch or auto-route queries. These tools reduce friction by letting ChatGPT, Kimi, Claude, and others coexist in one workspace.
4. Combine outputs Use both models in sequence when useful. One can produce technical depth while the other refines clarity or style. This dual approach helps cover each model’s weaknesses.
5. Address weaknesses directly If Kimi is overly terse or assumption-prone, adjust prompting or fine-tune it. If ChatGPT falls short on certain analytical tasks, route those to Kimi. Using multiple models helps avoid dependence on a single set of quirks.
Kimi K2 Thinking Use Guide For Free
Novita AI currently offers the most affordable full-context Kimi-K2-Thinking API.
Novita AI provides APIs with 262K context, and costs of $0.6/input and $2.5/output, supporting structured output and function calling, which delivers strong support for maximizing Kimi K2 Thinking”s code agent potential.
Step 1: Log in to your account and click on the Model Library button.
Browse through the available options and select the model that suits your needs.
Step 3: Start Your Free Trial
Begin your free trial to explore the capabilities of the selected model.
Step 4: Get Your API Key
To authenticate with the API, we will provide you with a new API key. Entering the “Settings“ page, you can copy the API key as indicated in the image.
Step 5: Install the API
Install API using the package manager specific to your programming language.
After installation, import the necessary libraries into your development environment. Initialize the API with your API key to start interacting with Novita AI LLM. This is an example of using chat completions API for python users.
from openai import OpenAI
client = OpenAI(
api_key="<Your API Key>",
base_url="https://api.novita.ai/openai"
)
response = client.chat.completions.create(
model="moonshotai/kimi-k2-thinking",
messages=[
{"role": "system", "content": "You are a helpful assistant."},
{"role": "user", "content": "Hello, how are you?"}
],
max_tokens=262144,
temperature=0.7
)
print(response.choices[0].message.content)
In the Long Term, Could Kimi Replace ChatGPT？
One thing is clear: the presence of Kimi and similar models ensures ChatGPT can’t rest on its laurels. Competition drives innovation, as a Redditor succinctly put it: “Always shop around… whether it’s your insurance, your vote or your chatbot”
Kimi K2 Thinking proves that a comparatively low-budget, open-weight model can challenge or even exceed ChatGPT-level systems such as GPT-5 (High) on coding, long-horizon tool use, and cost efficiency, while unlocking powerful local-deployment and data-sovereignty benefits. At the same time, ChatGPT (especially GPT-5.1) retains clear advantages in multimodal capabilities, conversational polish, ecosystem maturity, and enterprise-grade infrastructure.
Rather than a simple replacement story, the evidence points to specialization and coexistence: Kimi K2 Thinking as a high-leverage engine for code, agents, and on-prem workloads; ChatGPT as a refined, multimodal, and deeply integrated assistant. In the long run, open models like Kimi K2 Thinking ensure that ChatGPT cannot stagnate, and the most rational strategy for users is not loyalty to a single model but deliberate orchestration of both.
Frequently Asked Questions
How does the training cost of Kimi K2 Thinking compare to GPT-4 and DeepSeek V3?
Kimi K2 Thinking was reported at about 4.6M USD, well under GPT-4’s training cost and even less than the 5.6M USD disclosed for DeepSeek V3, showing that frontier-level performance no longer requires frontier-level budgets.
Can Kimi K2 Thinking replace ChatGPT GPT-5 for multimodal tasks?
No; ChatGPT GPT-5 (and GPT-4o) handle images, audio, and video natively, whereas Kimi K2 Thinking is text-only and must call external tools, so ChatGPT remains the stronger choice for multimodal work.
Is ChatGPT’s ecosystem really more mature than Kimi’s?
Yes; ChatGPT (across GPT-4, GPT-4o, and GPT-5.1) has richer APIs, plugins, SDKs, and enterprise support, while Kimi K2 Thinking is newer, more open, and growing fast but still lacks the same breadth of production-grade integrations.
Novita AI is the All-in-one cloud platform that empowers your AI ambitions. Integrated APIs, serverless, GPU Instance — the cost-effective tools you need. Eliminate infrastructure, start free, and make your AI vision a reality.
