Roboflow

Gemini 3 Pro vs Kimi K2.5

Compare Gemini 3 Pro and Kimi K2.5 side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in OCR, Image Captioning, and Open Prompt.

Compare Gemini 3 Pro vs Kimi K2.5 live

Run the same image across every model that supports a task and compare their outputs side-by-side.

Extract and compare text from images across multiple models.

Open OCR in the full playground
GoogleGemini 3 Pro

Gemini 3 Pro is deprecated and can no longer be run. Details and evals are still available on its model page.

MoonshotAIKimi K2.5
Run to compare this model.

Models in this comparison

MoonshotAI

Gemini 3 Pro vs Kimi K2.5: Overview

Gemini 3 Pro

Gemini 3 Pro is Google DeepMind’s flagship multimodal frontier model, built for high-accuracy reasoning and large-scale context understanding across text, images, audio, video, code, and documents. It delivers major gains over Gemini 2.5 Pro, supported by a 1M-token window and strong performance on Google-reported benchmarks such as GPQA Diamond, MMMU-Pro, and Video-MMMU.

The model excels at structured outputs, tool use, and agentic coding, enabling complex multi-step workflows and analysis of entire books, codebases, or long videos in a single prompt. Positioned as Google’s top production model, it balances advanced reasoning with broad multimodal capabilities, making it well suited for research assistants, automation agents, coding systems, and enterprise-scale document and media analysis.

Kimi K2.5

Kimi K2.5 is a frontier-scale multimodal AI model developed by Moonshot AI and released on January 27, 2026. As a significant advancement within the Kimi K2 family, it utilizes a sparse Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) architecture with 1 trillion total parameters (32 billion active per inference) and a massive 256K-token context window. The model features native multimodal integration via a 400M-parameter MoonViT encoder, allowing it to process text, images, and video frames simultaneously. Built for both speed and depth, it offers "Instant" and "Thinking" modes, the latter of which excels at expert-level reasoning, scoring 50.2% on the Humanity’s Last Exam (HLE) benchmark when equipped with tools.

The model is released under a Modified MIT License, which remains open-weight but requires attribution for high-revenue commercial entities. It introduces an "Agent Swarm" paradigm capable of coordinating up to 100 specialized sub-agents for parallel workflows, significantly reducing latency in complex research tasks. For vision tasks, Kimi K2.5 demonstrates strong autonomous visual debugging capabilities, where it can inspect its own generated UI outputs against visual specifications to iteratively refine frontend code. This makes it a powerful choice for developers testing automated UI reconstruction, high-fidelity OCR document processing, and multi-step agentic research grounded in complex visual data.

Gemini 3 Pro vs Kimi K2.5 Comparison Table

PropertyGemini 3 ProKimi K2.5
OrganizationGoogleMoonshot AI
Categoryclosedopen
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateNov 2025Jan 2026
Context Window1.0M256K
Parameters1T
LicenseProprietaryModified MIT
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$0.570
Output $/1M$2.85
Vision Tasks
CaptioningDemo
OCRDemo
Vision Language
Visual Question AnsweringDemo
Classification
Object Detection
Model Features
Multimodal Vision
Foundation Vision
LLMs with Vision Capabilities
Vision Evalspass/fail results · 67 prompts
Score key:≥75%40–74%<40%
Visual Understanding
Overall Score
35.82%
Avg Response Time14.81s
Median input tokensincl. image tokens1.6K
Median output tokens766
Est. cost / taskon this benchmark$0.0031
Defect Detection
46.7%(7/15)
Document Understanding
55.6%(5/9)
Object Counting
10%(1/10)
Object Understanding
42.9%(6/14)
Spatial Understanding
26.3%(5/19)
OCR
Overall Score
19.65%
Avg Response Time13.09s
Median input tokensincl. image tokens119
Median output tokens258
Est. cost / taskon this benchmark$0.0008
Focused Scene OCR
10.1%(10/99)
Handwritten Math
50%(5/10)
License Plate Recognition
6.7%(2/30)
Text Recognition
26.7%(8/30)
VQA & Extraction
33.3%(20/60)

Output tokens (incl. reasoning) and est. cost / task are measured on this benchmark from a single low-temperature run, and shown only for models whose run covered at least 90% of prompts. Methodology