// head_to_head

Nova Pro 1.0 vs Kimi K2.7 Code

Published LiveBench scores across all seven categories, live list pricing, context windows, and the measured cost of a point of capability — for both models, side by side.

OpenRouter + LiveBenchAll comparisonsFull leaderboard

Nova Pro 1.0 and Kimi K2.7 Code are priced within ~10% of each other.

Nova Pro 1.0 does not have a published LiveBench run, so this comparison covers price, context and declared capabilities only. A missing score means "not evaluated", not "worse" — the right way to separate these two is an eval on your own workload.

amazon

Nova Pro 1.0

Blended / 1M
$1.40
Context
300K
Released
Dec 5, 2024
Overall score
Not evaluated
tool callingimage input

moonshotai

Kimi K2.7 Code

Blended / 1M
$1.35
Context
262K
Released
Jun 12, 2026
Overall score
68.4
reasoningtool callingimage inputprompt caching

Specs and pricing

MetricNova Pro 1.0Kimi K2.7 Code
LiveBench overall

Mean of the seven LiveBench category scores, 0–100. Higher is better.

68.4
Cost per point

Measured benchmark spend divided by overall score — dollars per point of capability.

$0.0545
Blended price / 1M

3:1 input:output mix, the usual shape of production traffic.

$1.40$1.35
Input price / 1M$0.800$0.706win
Output price / 1M$3.20$3.30
Cached input / 1M

Price of an input token served from the prompt cache, where the provider publishes one.

$0.180
Context window300K262K
Max output tokens5K236Kwin

Benchmarks by category

An overall score averages away the thing you probably care about. These are the seven LiveBench categories scored separately — Nova Pro 1.0 on top, Kimi K2.7 Code below, both out of 100.

Agentic coding
45.7
Coding
74.0
Reasoning
82.8
Mathematics
79.6
Data analysis
62.7
Language
77.9
Instruction following
56.3

What each one costs to run

Per-token prices are hard to feel. These are monthly list costs for both models across five workload shapes, using each provider's published cached-input rate where there is one.

WorkloadNova Pro 1.0Kimi K2.7 Code
Support chatbot

1.2K in / 400 out × 200K requests

$448.00/mo$395.60/mo
RAG assistant

8K in / 600 out × 100K requests

$832.00/mo$552.48/mo
Coding agent

40K in / 4K out × 20K requests

$896.00/mo$534.29/mo
Document extraction

20K in / 1.5K out × 50K requests

$1,040/mo$927.39/mo
Bulk classification

500 in / 20 out × 5M requests

$2,320/mo$1,832/mo
Run these two through the cost calculator

Nova Pro 1.0 vs Kimi K2.7 Code FAQ

Which is better, Nova Pro 1.0 or Kimi K2.7 Code?

Nova Pro 1.0 and Kimi K2.7 Code are priced within ~10% of each other. Nova Pro 1.0 does not have a published LiveBench run, so this comparison covers price, context and declared capabilities only. A missing score means "not evaluated", not "worse" — the right way to separate these two is an eval on your own workload.

Is Nova Pro 1.0 cheaper than Kimi K2.7 Code?

They cost about the same. Both land near $1.40 per million tokens on a 3:1 input:output blend, so price is unlikely to be the deciding factor between them.

Does Nova Pro 1.0 or Kimi K2.7 Code have a bigger context window?

They are effectively the same — 300K for Nova Pro 1.0 and 262K for Kimi K2.7 Code.

Do Nova Pro 1.0 and Kimi K2.7 Code support prompt caching?

Kimi K2.7 Code publishes a cached-input rate of $0.180 per million tokens against a full input rate of $0.706. The catalogue lists no separate cached rate for Nova Pro 1.0, which means the provider does not price it separately here — not that caching is unavailable.

Related comparisons

How these numbers are produced

  • Price — provider list price from OpenRouter, refreshed every 15 minutes. “Blended” is a 3:1 input:output mix.
  • ScoresLiveBench release 2026-06-25, using their own category map. Each model shows its strongest published run. A blank means “not evaluated”, never “bad”.
  • Cost per point — the measured dollars LiveBench spent on the run, divided by the score it earned.
  • “Win” — awarded only past a threshold: one full point on a benchmark score, 10% on a price, 25% on a context window. Anything tighter reports as a tie, because effort settings alone move a LiveBench score by more than that.

Published benchmarks rank models on someone else's tasks. Before committing, see LLM & agent evaluation for building an eval on your own.