Kimi accused of downplaying DeepSeek in Terminal Bench chart; author responds
teortaxesTex · x · 2026-10-24
Kimi was accused of visually downplaying DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 in a Terminal Bench chart (65.7% vs 42.3%) while K3.1 Pro costs 20x more per task, and of mixing data sources for TB4.0 scores. Longhui Yu responded that the discrepancies also affected Opus 5.5, that matching score+cost data forced the source choice, and that their general practice is reporting the highest available score per model—with no intent to hide anything.
More from Models
- Observer: newest GPT models reply like a ritual, acting as if the user isn't real — louisvarge · 2026-10-24
- ISTA quantizes DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash to 2 bits with zero benchmark loss, runs on one 12GB GPU — Loginhe · 2026-10-24
- Redditor claims Kimi K3.1 Pro's frontend outputs closely copy rival model Astra — GreedyWorry4167 · 2026-10-24
- Head-to-head coding duel: Opus 5.5 vs Kimi K3.1 Pro on the same Canvas 2D game — Scobleizer · 2026-10-24
- OrcaRouter open-sources abliterated DeepSeek V4.1: 91.5% fewer refusals, MMLU ticks up — airesearch12 · 2026-10-24
- Kimi K3.1 Pro projected to top DesignArena open-weights website leaderboard — airesearch12 · 2026-10-24