Gemini 3.8 Flash vs Kimi K3
Which one, when
Both models share the same 1048576-token context window, so the split comes down to price, modalities and output length: gemini-3.8-flash runs $0.75 input and $3.75 output against $3 and $15 for kimi-k3, making Google's model 4x cheaper on both sides plus 4x cheaper on cache reads ($0.075 vs $0.3). Pick gemini-3.8-flash for cost-sensitive high-volume work or when you need audio and video in alongside text and images. Pick kimi-k3 when a single response must run long, since its 1048576-token max output dwarfs the 65536 cap on Flash; note its reasoning cannot be turned off.
Benchmarks
5 measured on both.
Vendor-published: Alibaba (Qwen) Anthropic ByteDance DeepSeek Google MiniMax Moonshot OpenAI Tencent Z.ai
Pricing
| Gemini 3.8 Flash | Kimi K3 | Δ | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / 1M tokens | $0.75 | $3 | 0.25× |
| Output / 1M tokens | $3.75 | $15 | 0.25× |
| Cache read / 1M tokens | $0.075 | $0.3 | 0.25× |
Rates from the live catalog at build time; each model page carries the current card.
Where they sit - input price per 1M tokens across all 71 chat models on this billing unit (log scale)
Capabilities
| Gemini 3.8 Flash | Kimi K3 | |
|---|---|---|
| Tool use | yes | yes |
| Thinking control | yes - vendor dial not published | always on |
| Structured output | yes | yes |
| Prompt caching | implicit + explicit | implicit (automatic) |
| Cache lifetime | not published | not published |
| Minimum cached prefix | 4096 tokens | not published |
Specs
| Gemini 3.8 Flash | Kimi K3 | |
|---|---|---|
| Input modalities | text image audio video | text image video |
| Output modalities | text | text |
| Released | 2026-09-02 | - |
| Knowledge cutoff | 2026-03 | - |
| Context window | 1M | 1M |
| Max output | 66K | 1M |
| Thinking parameter | - | reasoning_effort (top-level; the thinking object is not accepted) |
| Accepted values | - | reasoning_effort
|
| Default | - | max |
Specs are transcribed from each vendor’s documentation; a row a vendor does not publish is left out rather than inferred. Full sources: Gemini 3.8 Flash · Kimi K3
One prompt, both models - measured through the gateway
Gemini 3.8 Flash passed · 3 sentences
When we enabled reasoning, the model began generating hidden "thinking tokens" to work through logic step-by-step before producing a final answer. Because AI vendors bill for every single token processed—visible or not—this internal deliberation dramatically inflated our billable volume per query. In short, while our total number of user requests remained flat, the cost per transaction doubled to buy higher accuracy on complex tasks.
out 705 tok (+624 thinking) latency 6.4 s
Kimi K3 passed · 3 sentences
Reasoning models don't just answer questions—they "think" first, generating long internal chains of step-by-step logic before producing a response. Those hidden thinking steps are billed as output tokens (the most expensive kind, typically 3–5x the price of input tokens), and a single query can generate thousands of them even when the visible answer is only a paragraph long. So you're paying for dramatically more compute per request: the bill doubled because the model does far more work behind the scenes, not because usage increased.
out 755 tok (+637 thinking) latency 20.8 s
Instruction following (exactly three sentences - countable), audience shaping (CFO register), and the hidden-thinking billing gap the token meters below expose.
Gemini 3.8 Flash passed · 8/8 cases
Here is the corrected function: ```python def longest_run(xs): if not xs: return 0 best = 1 cur = 1 for i in range(1, len(xs)): if xs[i] == xs[i - 1]: cur += 1 best = max(best, cur) else: cur = 1 return best ``` ### Explanation of the Bug The original function counted equal-neighbor transitions rather than the actual items making up each run. Because `cur` started at `0` (and was reset to `0` on mismatches), every run was undercounted by one: single-element lists returned `0` because the loop never executed, and any subsequent run—including those ending at the last index—recorded a count of $N - 1$ instead of $N$. The fix handles empty input upfront, initializes both `cur` and `best` to `1` (since any single element forms a run of length 1), and resets `cur` to `1` whenever a new run begins.
out 1393 tok (+1149 thinking) latency 10.1 s
Kimi K3 passed · 8/8 cases
```python def longest_run(xs): if not xs: return 0 best = 1 cur = 1 for i in range(1, len(xs)): if xs[i] == xs[i - 1]: cur += 1 best = max(best, cur) else: cur = 1 return best ``` The bug is a fencepost error: `cur` counts *matching adjacent pairs* rather than *items in the run*, because it starts at 0 and only increments when `xs[i] == xs[i - 1]`. A run of length L contains L−1 equal pairs, so every run was undercounted by exactly one. For a single-element list (a run of length 1) the loop never runs and the function returns 0 instead of 1; likewise any run ending at the last index — e.g. the two `2`s in `[1, 2, 2]` — reported 1 instead of 2, making it look like no run existed at all. […]
out 1837 tok (+1547 thinking) latency 47.2 s
Whether the fix is actually correct (runnable), explanation density, and token efficiency on a bounded task.
Gemini 3.8 Flash passed · 5/5 fields, guidance null
```json { "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "September quarter", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": null, "guidance": null } ```
out 3989 tok (+3932 thinking) latency 30.4 s
Kimi K3 passed · 5/5 fields, guidance null
{ "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "September quarter", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": 11, "guidance": null }
out 924 tok (+863 thinking) latency 25.9 s
Schema obedience (no invented fields), hallucination pressure (guidance is explicitly withheld), and structured-output path differences.
Gemini 3.8 Flash passed · 120 words, 0 banned, 1 question
Why pay multiple model providers for the exact same output? Introducing Universal Prompt Cache, our latest API gateway capability engineered to cut compute expenses and drop inference latency. When your application makes a call, the gateway inspects a central memory layer before routing traffic to external LLMs. If an identical query was previously processed by OpenAI, Anthropic, or Mistral, our gateway returns that response immediately. This shared cache eliminates duplicate token fees and insulates your production apps from vendor rate limits or unexpected downtime. Developers can easily customize expiration settings, enforce strict data privacy controls, and configure invalidation logic across every endpoint. Stop wasting your budget on repeated queries. Enable prompt caching in your dashboard to accelerate your pipeline today.
out 3833 tok (+3688 thinking) latency 21.8 s
Kimi K3 passed · 120 words, 0 banned, 1 question
Meet Prompt Cache, a new API gateway capability that stores prompt responses and serves them across OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, and Azure endpoints. It matches requests by model, prompt hash, tools, temperature, and tenant policy, so repeated work returns fast while sensitive contexts stay isolated. Teams set TTLs, stale rules, encryption scopes, and bypass flags per route. Analytics show hit rate, latency saved, token spend avoided, and drift risk by provider. What changes for developers? Keep one integration, add cache headers, and watch fallback logic respect consent, residency, and audit needs. During rollout, canary keys compare fresh answers with cached copies before promotion. Prompt Cache cuts vendor calls, steadies p95 latency, and gives platform owners controls for cost, quality, and compliance.
out 1527 tok (+1354 thinking) latency 37.9 s
Constraint obedience (word budget, banned-word list, the single question), style fingerprint, and length control.
Switch between them with one line
Both ids are in every tab below - the highlighted pair of lines is the only edit. Same endpoint, same key, same request shape.
from openai import OpenAI
client = OpenAI(
base_url="https://synthorai.io/v1",
api_key="sk-syn-...",
)
resp = client.chat.completions.create(
model="gemini-3.8-flash",
# model="kimi-k3", # uncomment this line, comment the one above
messages=[{"role": "user", "content": "Summarize this diff"}],
reasoning_effort="medium",
)
print(resp.choices[0].message.content)import OpenAI from "openai";
const client = new OpenAI({
baseURL: "https://synthorai.io/v1",
apiKey: "sk-syn-...",
});
const resp = await client.chat.completions.create({
model: "gemini-3.8-flash",
// model: "kimi-k3", // uncomment this line, comment the one above
messages: [{ role: "user", content: "Summarize this diff" }],
reasoning_effort: "medium",
});
console.log(resp.choices[0].message.content);curl https://synthorai.io/v1/chat/completions \
-H "Authorization: Bearer sk-syn-..." \
-H "Content-Type: application/json" \
-d '{
"model": "gemini-3.8-flash",
# "model": "kimi-k3", # uncomment this line, comment the one above
"messages": [{"role": "user", "content": "Hello"}],
"reasoning_effort": "medium"
}'package main
import (
"context"
"fmt"
"github.com/openai/openai-go/v3"
"github.com/openai/openai-go/v3/option"
)
func main() {
client := openai.NewClient(
option.WithBaseURL("https://synthorai.io/v1"),
option.WithAPIKey("sk-syn-..."),
)
resp, _ := client.Chat.Completions.New(context.TODO(), openai.ChatCompletionNewParams{
Model: "gemini-3.8-flash",
// Model: "kimi-k3", // uncomment this line, comment the one above
Messages: []openai.ChatCompletionMessageParamUnion{
openai.UserMessage("Summarize this diff"),
},
ReasoningEffort: openai.ReasoningEffortMedium,
})
fmt.Println(resp.Choices[0].Message.Content)
}import com.openai.client.OpenAIClient;
import com.openai.client.okhttp.OpenAIOkHttpClient;
import com.openai.models.chat.completions.*;
import com.openai.models.ReasoningEffort;
OpenAIClient client = OpenAIOkHttpClient.builder()
.baseUrl("https://synthorai.io/v1")
.apiKey("sk-syn-...")
.build();
ChatCompletion resp = client.chat().completions().create(
ChatCompletionCreateParams.builder()
.model("gemini-3.8-flash")
// .model("kimi-k3") // uncomment this line, comment the one above
.addUserMessage("Summarize this diff")
.reasoningEffort(ReasoningEffort.MEDIUM)
.build());
System.out.println(resp.choices().get(0).message().content().orElse(""));FAQ
Which is cheaper, Gemini 3.8 Flash or Kimi K3?
Gemini 3.8 Flash is cheaper on input / 1m tokens ($0.75 vs $3, 4.0× apart). Other rows may point the other way - the table above carries the full card, and real cost depends on your mix.
Can I A/B test Gemini 3.8 Flash against Kimi K3 without two integrations?
Yes. Both are served through the same OpenAI-compatible endpoint with one API key - switching is a one-line model-string change, so you can route a fraction of traffic to each and compare bills directly.
Do Gemini 3.8 Flash and Kimi K3 support prompt caching?
Yes - both bill cached reads below their input rate, so warm-prefix workloads cost less than the list rates suggest. The exact cache-read rows are in the pricing table above.