Skip to content

Kimi K3.1 Pro (batch) vs Muse Ember

Kimi K3.1 Pro (batch)

Moonshot AI

40#199
vs
Muse Ember

meta

40#185
Signal-by-Signal Comparison
SignalKimi K3.1 Pro (batch)DeltaMuse Ember
Capabilities
50
-50
100
Pricing
94
-5
100
Context window size
96
--
96
Recency
100
--
100
Output Capacity
96
--
96
Overall Result
0 wins
of 5
2 wins
Muse Ember wins 2 of 5 signals

Score History Unavailable

Not enough historical data to show a comparison chart. Score history is recorded weekly and will be available after at least two data points are collected.

40

Kimi K3.1 Pro (batch)

vs

40

Muse Ember

Interactive Price Comparison
100Kcalls/month
1,000tokens (~1,333 chars)
500tokens (~667 chars)

Kimi K3.1 Pro (batch)

Moonshot AI

Per request$0.003700
Daily$12.33
Monthly$370.00
Annual$4440.00

Muse Ember

meta

Best Value
Per request$0.000350
Daily$1.17
Monthly$35.00
Annual$420.00

Muse Ember saves you $335.00/month

That's $4020.00/year compared to Kimi K3.1 Pro (batch) at your current usage level of 100K calls/month.

91% cheaper
Choose Muse Ember for cost optimization

Kimi K3.1 Pro (batch) pricing:
Input:$0.70/M tokens
Output:$6.00/M tokens
Muse Ember pricing:
Input:$0.10/M tokens
Output:$0.50/M tokens
Tie
Kimi K3.1 Pro (batch)

Moonshot AI

40

Composite Score

Tie
Muse Ember

meta

40

Composite Score

Signal-by-Signal Comparison
MetricKimi K3.1 Pro (batch)Muse EmberWinner
Overall Score
40
40
--
Rank#199#185
Muse Ember
Quality Rank#199#185
Muse Ember
Adoption Rank#199#185
Muse Ember
Parameters------
Context Window1049K1049K--
Pricing$0.70/$6.00/M$0.10/$0.50/M--
Signal Scores
Capabilities
50
100
Muse Ember
Pricing
94
100
Muse Ember
Context window size
96
96
Kimi K3.1 Pro (batch)
Recency
100
100
Kimi K3.1 Pro (batch)
Output Capacity
96
96
Kimi K3.1 Pro (batch)
Benchmark Interpretation

Our score (0-100) is driven by benchmark performance (90%) from Arena Elo ratings, MMLU, GPQA, HumanEval, SWE-bench, and 15+ standardized evaluations. Capabilities and context window serve as tiebreakers (10%). Learn more about our methodology.

Kimi K3.1 Pro (batch)Entry Level

Scores 40/100 (rank #199), placing it in the top 32% of all 290 models tracked.

Raw Quality0/100
Cost Efficiency0/100
Speed0/100
Muse EmberEntry Level

Scores 40/100 (rank #185), placing it in the top 37% of all 290 models tracked.

Raw Quality0/100
Cost Efficiency0/100
Speed0/100

With only a 0-point gap, these models are in the same performance tier. The practical difference in output quality is minimal - your choice should depend on pricing, latency requirements, and specific feature needs.

When to Use Each Model

Choose Kimi K3.1 Pro (batch) when you need:

  • Step-by-step reasoning and chain-of-thought problem solving
  • Self-hosted deployments where you need full control over the model

Choose Muse Ember when you need:

  • High-volume production workloads where API costs must be minimized
  • Agentic applications using tool/function calling
  • Step-by-step reasoning and chain-of-thought problem solving
Cost-Performance Analysis
Kimi K3.1 Pro (batch)
Input cost$0.70/M tokens
Output cost$6.00/M tokens
Cost per quality point$0.168
Est. monthly (1M tokens/day)$100.50
Muse EmberBest Value
Input cost$0.10/M tokens
Output cost$0.50/M tokens
Cost per quality point$0.015
Est. monthly (1M tokens/day)$9.00

Muse Ember offers 91% better value per quality point. At 1M tokens/day, you'd spend $9.00/month with Muse Ember vs $100.50/month with Kimi K3.1 Pro (batch) - a $91.50 monthly difference.

Latency & Speed
Kimi K3.1 Pro (batch)Faster
Speed score0/100
Muse Ember
Speed score0/100

Both models have comparable response speeds. For most applications, the latency difference is negligible.

When latency matters most: Interactive chatbots, IDE code completion, real-time translation, and user-facing applications where response time directly impacts experience. For batch processing, background summarization, or offline analysis, latency is less critical.

Example Use Cases

Code generation & review

Based on overall model capabilities and architecture for coding tasks like generating functions, debugging, and refactoring

Kimi K3.1 Pro (batch)

Customer support chatbot

Suitable for user-facing chat with competitive response times. Muse Ember also offers lower per-token costs for high-volume support

Kimi K3.1 Pro (batch)

Long document analysis

Larger context window (1049K tokens) can process longer documents, contracts, and research papers in a single pass

Kimi K3.1 Pro (batch)

Batch data extraction

Lower output pricing ($0.50/M) reduces costs when processing thousands of records daily

Muse Ember

Creative writing & content

Higher overall composite score (40/100) correlates with better nuance, coherence, and style in long-form content

Kimi K3.1 Pro (batch)

Image understanding & OCR

Supports vision input - can analyze screenshots, diagrams, photos, and scanned documents directly

Kimi K3.1 Pro (batch)
Which Should You Choose?
Our recommendation:
Kimi K3.1 Pro (batch)

Kimi K3.1 Pro (batch) and Muse Ember are extremely close in overall performance (only 0 points apart). Your best choice depends entirely on which specific strengths matter most for your use case.

by Moonshot AI

  • Choose for Quality - Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
  • Choose for Reliability - Higher uptime and faster response speeds
  • Choose for Prototyping - Stronger community support and better developer experience
  • Choose for Production - Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale

by meta

  • Choose for Cost - 91% lower pricing; better value at scale
Capability Comparison
CapabilityKimi K3.1 Pro (batch)Muse Ember
Vision (Image Input)
Function Callingdiffers
Streaming
JSON Modediffers
Reasoning
Web Searchdiffers
Image Output
Monthly Cost Calculator
1,000tokens (600 in / 400 out)
100requests/day (3,000/month)

Kimi K3.1 Pro (batch)

Moonshot AI

$8.46
estimated monthly cost

Muse Ember

meta

Best Value
$0.7800
estimated monthly cost

Muse Ember saves you $7.68/month

That's 91% cheaper than Kimi K3.1 Pro (batch) at 1,000 tokens/request and 100 requests/day.

Assumes 60% input / 40% output token ratio per request. Actual costs may vary based on your usage pattern.

Parameters & Context
ParameterKimi K3.1 Pro (batch)Muse Ember
Context Window1.0M1.0M
Max Output Tokens943,718943,718
Open SourceYesNo
CreatedOct 23, 2026Nov 9, 2026
Last updated: 7m ago

相关对比

Kimi K3.1 Pro (batch) vs Muse Ember (2026) | LM Market Cap