Anthropic Claude Sonnet 5 (1M) vs Moonshot Kimi K3.7 (512k)

Side-by-side comparison of pricing, context window, capabilities, and a real-cost sample workload.

Option A

Anthropic Claude Sonnet 5 (1M)

by Anthropic
Context:1M
Input:$3.00 / 1M
Output:$15.00 / 1M
Released:2026-07
Option B

Moonshot Kimi K3.7 (512k)

by Moonshot AI
Context:512K
Input:$0.60 / 1M
Output:$2.50 / 1M
Released:2026-07

Detailed Comparison

DimensionAnthropic Claude Sonnet 5 (1M)Moonshot Kimi K3.7 (512k)
ProviderAnthropicMoonshot AI
Context window Winner1M512K
Input price ($/1M) Winner$3.00$0.60
Output price ($/1M) Winner$15.00$2.50
Sample workload cost Winner
1M input + 500K output tokens
$10.50 $1.85
Released TieTie2026-072026-07
Tokenizerclaude-4kimi

The verdict

On the dimensions we measured, Moonshot Kimi K3.7 (512k) wins more often - particularly on cost-effectiveness for a typical 1M+0.5M workload.

Anthropic Claude Sonnet 5 (1M) - Key features

The workhorse of the Claude 5 family. Sonnet 5 lands close to Opus 4.8 on coding and agentic benchmarks while staying at the long-standing Sonnet price, with a 1M token context window available by default.

  • 1M token context window
  • Near-Opus coding quality
  • Fast time to first token
  • Strong tool use and structured output
  • Batch and caching discounts

Moonshot Kimi K3.7 (512k) - Key features

Moonshot's flagship Kimi K3.7, an open-weight mixture-of-experts model with a 512K token window. K3.7 closes most of the gap to Western frontier models on agentic coding while staying dramatically cheaper.

  • 512K token context window
  • Open-weight MoE architecture
  • Strong agentic tool use
  • Aggressive price per token
  • Native long-horizon planning

How to choose

Estimate the real cost of either model for your prompts using our Token Calculator.