@cline: BTW how much it costs to run terminal bench with kimi k3 vs fable and gpt...
Summary
Discussion of cost comparison for running terminal benchmarks using Kimi K3, Fable, and GPT models.
View Cached Full Text
Cached at: 07/27/26, 07:57 PM
BTW how much it costs to run terminal bench with kimi k3 vs fable and gpt… https://t.co/2XXlOtZU7i
Similar Articles
Kimi K3 Coding Benchmarks
Kimi K3 coding benchmarks article discussing performance of the Kimi K3 model on coding tasks.
@cline: Kimi costs ~3-12x cheaper than Fable, but how much more could you save hosting it yourself? We ran the numbers on Cline…
Cline compares the cost of using Kimi vs Fable for token inference, finding Kimi 3-12x cheaper, and predicts that self-hosting open-weight models will become standard for businesses as token consumption scales, especially with models like Kimi K3.
Ran 12 real multi-app agent tasks on Fable 5, Kimi K3 and GPT-5.6 Sol. Cheapest model tied the most expensive one.
A benchmark of three AI agents on 12 multi-app tasks shows Kimi K3 tied the most expensive model GPT-5.6 Sol at a fraction of the cost, though all three failed cross-app reconcile tasks, highlighting the need for verification in production.
@cline: GPT-5.6 sets a new Terminal-Bench record at 91.9%. Priced the same as GPT 5.5 at $5/$30 per million tokens. With Fable …
GPT-5.6 sets a new Terminal-Bench record at 91.9%, priced the same as GPT-5.5 at $5/$30 per million tokens, while Fable moves to API with higher costs.
@EvanLuthra: Kimi K2 was trained for $4.6 MILLION. GPT-5 reportedly cost hundreds of millions. Kimi still beats it on coding. Last w…
Kimi K2, trained for $4.6 million, outperforms GPT-5 and Claude Opus 4.7 on coding benchmarks, with a detailed breakdown from its founder.