Compare/Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) vs Apodex 1.1

Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning)vsApodex 1.1

Side-by-side comparison of pricing, 12 benchmarks, and generation speed.

Kimi

Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning)

Input
$0.6/M
Output
$3/M
Speed
TTFT
Apodex

Apodex 1.1

Input
$0.3/M
Output
$3/M
Speed
TTFT

Winner by Category

Cheaper
Apodex 1.1
Faster (tok/s)
Lower Latency
Benchmarks (0-2)
Apodex 1.1

Pricing Comparison

MetricKimi K2.5 (Reasoning)Apodex 1.1
Input ($/M tokens)$0.6$0.3
Output ($/M tokens)$3$3
Cost for 1M input + 100K output tokens:
Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning)$0.90
Apodex 1.1$0.60

Speed Comparison

Speed data not available for these models.

Editorial Analysis

Verdict. Apodex 1.1 takes the aggregate benchmark matchup 2–0 across 2 categories. Real workloads usually care about a handful of specific tasks — see the per-benchmark table above.

Pricing. Both models sit in the budget bracket for output-token pricing. At 1.0× the per-million-token cost, Apodex 1.1 is meaningfully cheaper if your traffic is output-heavy (long completions, document generation, agent loops). Apodex 1.1 makes more sense when output volume is low and absolute reasoning quality justifies the premium.

Strengths. Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) is strongest on Coding Index (46.8), Intelligence Index (36.0). Apodex 1.1 leads on Coding Index (60.8), Intelligence Index (44.0).

Speed. Speed data is incomplete for this pair; benchmark and price should decide.

Provider. Kimi and Apodex sell to overlapping but distinct developer audiences: Kimi tends to ship frontier reasoning models with premium positioning, while Apodex often prices more aggressively. Your existing vendor relationships, billing, and SLA preferences may matter as much as the raw numbers above.

Workload cost. Workload scenarios (per million requests at 30M input + 15M output tokens): Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) costs $63.00 ($756/year); Apodex 1.1 costs $54.00 ($648/year). At a smaller 5M-input/2M-output scale (single-developer tool or prototype): Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) ≈ $9.00/run, Apodex 1.1 ≈ $7.50/run. At agent/realtime scale (200M input / 100M output per million requests): Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) ≈ $420/run, Apodex 1.1 ≈ $360/run. Apodex 1.1 becomes more attractive at higher volume — the absolute per-token pricing difference compounds when you ship at scale.

Recommendation. Both models have legitimate use cases — the right answer depends on whether you are optimizing for benchmark ceiling, latency, or unit cost. Start with the cheaper / faster model, evaluate against your specific task, and only switch if the upgrade shows a meaningful lift.

Benchmark Comparison

Data from Artificial Analysis API — 12 benchmarks

Intelligence Index
36.044.0
Coding Index
46.860.8
Math Index
GPQA Diamond
MMLU-Pro
LiveCodeBench
AIME 2025
MATH-500
Humanity's Last Exam
SciCode
IFBench
TerminalBench
Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning)0 wins
2 winsApodex 1.1

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is cheaper, Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) or Apodex 1.1?

Apodex 1.1 is cheaper overall. Its blended price (3:1 input/output ratio) is $0.97/M tokens vs $1.20/M for Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning).

Which model performs better on benchmarks?

Apodex 1.1 wins 2 out of 12 benchmarks compared to 0 for Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning). See the detailed benchmark chart above for per-category results.

Which is faster for real-time applications?

Both models have comparable generation speeds.

When should I use Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) vs Apodex 1.1?

Choose based on your priorities: Apodex 1.1 for lower cost, Apodex 1.1 for stronger benchmark performance, and both have comparable speed. For latency-sensitive apps, check the TTFT comparison above.