Kimi K3-256k
293 points by monneyboi 4 hours ago | 87 comments

timcobb 37 minutes ago
Codex uses 256k masterfully, 1M is luxurious but still quite expensive and seems not necessary as a default.
reply
wxw 4 hours ago
> k3-256k is now available. Within 256k context, it delivers the same results. k3 (1M) consumes about twice as much quota as k3-256k.
reply
madihaa 4 hours ago
That's actually nice! I usually try to stay below 200k context anyway.
reply
chipgap98 2 hours ago
This exact same comment is the top comment on the reddit thread for this news

https://www.reddit.com/r/kimi/s/BFa1TR9vNg

reply
Permit 49 minutes ago
I searched one other comment of theirs in their history and see the same thing. On mobile so I can’t easily tell if this account is the bot account or if the ones on Reddit are.

HN: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47934437

Reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/1sxzzop/comment/...

reply
giancarlostoro 4 hours ago
For me the sweet spot is somewhere under 500k depending on how extensive I want to get. You can build up a sizable effort project in half a million tokens with Claude, with Claude having all the context from ground 0 to wherever you're off at.
reply
cyanydeez 4 hours ago
I'm always curious what you guys are working on; every git repo I've run a local model on and stick below <100k to increase speed seems effective enough to scope patches and changes.
reply
KronisLV 3 hours ago
My current Claude Code session has been going on for like 35 hours and has used up around 400 million tokens, thankfully almost all of those being cached (95-98%) - pretty typical for long form agentic work.

First you spend like 2-3 hours working on a plan, once you have that you just tell the model to go and implement it, do adversarial sub-agent review loops before each commit and also make sure that all tooling and tests pass (including coverage requirements). You do need to poke it in a slightly different direction every few hours, though. Not even any novel work, just some refactoring and SSE notification hardening, bug fixes, alongside environment tuning and getting rid of some bottlenecks (also migrated from Oracle to PostgreSQL but that's mostly done).

That said, Kimi somehow manages to use less context in the main thread than Anthropic's models (even when you use sub-agents and also dynamic workflows in Claude Code), might have something to do with either how the model is tuned or their Kimi Code harness - because even in most of the longer form sessions it doesn't seem to fill up quite as quickly (note: because the kimi vis tool doesn't have a full summary view across all agents, these are the main long running agent stats across some sessions, not sub-agents):

  total tokens    cache hit rate    wall time    peak context
  283M            98%               3963m        466k
  258M            97%               2724m        467k
  98M             94%               1353m        393k
  67M             97%               614m         434k
  75M             98%               1447m        498k
  53M             99%               191m         375k
  6M              96%               139m         124k
  7M              98%               86m          118k
  11M             99%               61m          147k
I could see 256k context being sufficient for all sorts of work, even if intermediate progress/plan tracking files and docs might have to be used along the way, in addition to whatever plan support the harness has (for example, if you document something that will be relevant for load testing you might need that in 10 turns but not during the ones before then).
reply
smotched 3 hours ago
Once you have the plan you don't need to keep the 2hrs of research in the context (which is most of it) you can drop that plan into a file and start fresh for implementation.
reply
XenophileJKO 2 hours ago
That is true, but I feel like sometimes if the conversation contains useful rational it can help to keep it. I think sometimes it is a judgement call, I will sometimes compress the context first.

If I feel like the model and I explored a lot of options I won't want to keep context as it might be confusing.

I think the more you use it the better judge you are of whether you should purge, compress, or just keep the context before executing the plan.

reply
dandaka 2 hours ago
Models work best when they have short instructions and no noise. "Conversation [may] contain" also means "conversation has a lot of noise". It degrades performance and increases cost.

I use handoff skill to ask model to write a prompt for itself.

reply
pertymcpert 47 minutes ago
The applicability of your advice is very model dependent. Some like Claude have very good long context performance, whereas others they fall off much quicker past some threshold.
reply
bkaae 3 hours ago
Thanks for sharing - is this a normal feature request you are implementing in this example or is this a project from scratch? Trying to get an idea of how your workflow compares to mine.
reply
KronisLV 28 minutes ago
Existing project and as usual, a few issues mashed together in one mostly coherent plan. The shorter Kimi sessions I mentioned were singular features, there 256k would be wholly adequate.

A greenfield project would probably allow at least 2x fewer tokens to be used in most of those long tasks, but I was mostly after consistency and bug fixes along the way as needed.

reply
vidarh 2 hours ago
Kimi CLI has a mechanism with checkpoints and the ability for the agent to revert to a checkpoint + a message of how to continue based on what went right/wrong. I don't know if that's the cause of what you've seen, but it's plausible.
reply
DelightOne 2 hours ago
With prefix caching, you get checkpoints for free. Do you mean that?
reply
vidarh 19 minutes ago
No. Prefix caching is just an optimisation on the server side. What Kimi CLI does is insert <system> tags that include a checkpoint marker with an id.

The model is then given a tool that allows the model to decide to roll back to a checkpoint + a message containing any additional useful information.

It's specifically instructed to use that tool[1] in cases like when it has inadvertendly read a large file where most of the content is not relevant to the task, or after a web search where it's found what it's looking for but most of the content isn't needed, or when it's written code that didn't work as expected, or similar.

It basically lets the model backtrack and "forget" irrelevant details at the end of the context but give itself hints on how it should continue from the checkpoint.

Though, interestingly they seem to be abandoning it in their new CLI (kimi-code), unless it's been folded into other functionality. Not sure if they just feel it's not needed any more with their newer models or if it just didn't work as well as they expected.

[1] named "D-Mail", or "DeLorean Mail" in a reference to Steins;Gate, which again references Back To The Future. See https://github.com/MoonshotAI/kimi-cli/blob/main/src/kimi_cl... and https://steins-gate.fandom.com/wiki/D-Mail

reply
giancarlostoro 3 hours ago
I had Claude build me a Python-inspired .NET language that treats .NET as a first class citizen, and breaks backwards compatibility where some Python nuances don't really apply to .NET for. I was able to get it to build a sample ASP .NET Web application that ran on Culebral code.

Haven't gone back to it, have been using Claude Code on a private project I'm still architecting.

https://github.com/Giancarlos/Culebral

reply
_zoltan_ 3 hours ago
I have a couple projects where the background research is easily over 500k without writing any code, after ultracode subagents synthesis.
reply
giancarlostoro 2 hours ago
I think the distinction is when the model decides to read code top to bottom vs when the model chooses to parse code indirectly to save on tokens, there's also AST tooling to let the model see project structure.
reply
sheeshkebab 3 hours ago
Try doing a refactoring of some sort or larger new feature using just an agent on a moderately sized codebase, 256k will be compacting every few minutes, and result will be unusable.
reply
hedgehog 2 hours ago
I do essentially all of my work with auto compact set to 250k and it's fine. It may be due to the way the project tooling is set up and the use of sub agents?
reply
jdoe1337halo 3 hours ago
They are just talking to the model in CC, while staying in a single thread. Doubt they have any actual coding knowledge to compartmentalize different problems in the codebase.
reply
giancarlostoro 3 hours ago
Depends on the programming language I'm using for a given project, and the domain I'm working with. I've been coding as a hobbyist for nearly two decades now (since my teens), professionally for 9 years, and was a TA before that for roughly 3 years at one of the best colleges for this field in the state (at least back then it was) where I taught other students about programming, in some cases I was their primary learning resource.

But yeah, I have no idea about anything about software because you made an assumption off very little to go by.

reply
pesfandiar 2 hours ago
"256k ought to be enough for anybody"
reply
xyzsparetimexyz 3 hours ago
Wow. So kimi is suddenly half the price for all users until they hit 256k of context? Thats massive.
reply
conradludgate 2 hours ago
As far as I understand, no. They're suggesting that smaller context windows are typically cheaper (fewer input tokens over time).
reply
InsideOutSanta 2 hours ago
I don't think so. This is a separate model, so I assume that if you just use this and switch to the 1 million context model when you reach 256k, your cache will be invalidated, so you'll re-pay the 256k tokens on the 1 million context model pricing.
reply
longwave 2 hours ago
The article explicitly says "The current version switching from 256k to 1M does not affect the cache."
reply
MangoCoffee 2 hours ago
LLMs is quickly became commodities. US AI labs like OpenAI is losing their moat. Hyperscalers and data center owners who can sell cheap token will win
reply
okrad 2 hours ago
I believe Codex harness is pretty sticky though I haven’t tried many others. Does anyone else provide a harness of that quality?
reply
conradludgate 2 hours ago
Their harness is indeed nice, but we're using it against our own AI Gateway at work. Right now we only expose GPT models on it, but I imagine it's possible to add our own models eventually
reply
nvarsj 2 hours ago
Pi harness with subagents is pretty great. I’m using it for everything now.
reply
ux266478 40 minutes ago
I have so much gratitude to the frontier companies who did all the extremely complicated research and development, model by model. It already feels difficult to remember how much capital it really took. Thank you for getting us to this point.
reply
illithid0 4 hours ago
This was posted 38 minutes ago, and as of 20 minutes ago, several Anthropic services are now designated as having a "major outage".

Doubt these are related, but it made me laugh a little.

reply
paxys 3 hours ago
Anthropic services have outages on all days ending in y.
reply
de6u99er 3 hours ago
So users in Germany are not affected?
reply
jampa 2 hours ago
Anthropic has better SLA in Germany. I’ve heard uptime there can get up to nein nines.
reply
zarmin 2 hours ago
Germany ends in y
reply
tshaddox 2 hours ago
Not in Germany.
reply
hebelehubele 2 hours ago
The word "Germany" is "Germany" everwhere and always ends with y. The country Germany has different names though.
reply
aksappy 2 hours ago
Germans prefer Deutschland, no?
reply
361994752 53 minutes ago
so Deutschland is not affected. Germany is
reply
wren6991 3 hours ago
This seems functionally similar to OpenAI having a step in pricing once you exceed a certain context length (also at 272k aka 2^18 aka 256k).

Having a lot of active context increases the per-token cost (flops issued and bytes read per token out) so it makes sense to pass that cost on to users. I'm actually surprised it's implemented as a hard cutoff instead of a smooth gradient.

reply
BoorishBears 2 hours ago
Not surprising it's a hard cutoff: they almost certainly have two infrastructure configurations for the two max sequence lengths

Fewer nodes dedicated to prefill per instance, and fewer nodes in total since you don't need to support a higher KV cache.

Disaggregated inference also means they can tune the balance of compute dedicated to prefill seperately from decode

reply
hawtads 4 hours ago
This is just an API level change right? The model itself should be the same I think.
reply
dools 2 hours ago
Hopefully this helps reduce some of the pressure on their infrastructure. Their models have all become super dumb recently and their support are not addressing it. I have a hunch they’ve been serving a significant percentage of requests with quantised models.
reply
stingraycharles 30 minutes ago
Ah come on, HN is not the place for these types of unfounded conspiracy theories that keep popping up on Reddit.
reply
dgritsko 4 hours ago
This isn't quantized, right? Just a smaller context?
reply
DSingularity 4 hours ago
Its 256k context window. Quantization is orthogonal. We cant really tell directly so it could be quantized.
reply
lukan 4 hours ago
Since Claude is the first time for me really, really out (TIL against my wished about https://status.claude.com/), I am now interested enough to see what else works. But ... when I click pricing, I see "Join a waitlist". Wtf? Are they really that good, so were totally surprised and overwhelmed by the requests, is this a marketing stunt, or do they just don't have the hardware being in china?
reply
KronisLV 3 hours ago
> Are they really that good,

They did exceed the expecations of pretty much everyone! I've also blogged about using the model, it's a bit on the slow side but pretty good!

> so were totally surprised and overwhelmed by the requests ... or do they just don't have the hardware being in china?

Yes, this is mostly the case: https://x.com/Kimi_Moonshot/status/2078855608565207130

As a user, I much prefer that to service disruptions or severely degraded or secretly quantized performance. However if I didn't have an account, I'd be pretty pissed off about not being able to give them money and become a user.

reply
lukan 3 hours ago
"I'd be pretty pissed off about not being able to give them money and become a user."

I am now rather pretty pissed towards antrophic for stopping my flow and forcing me to search for alternatives.

reply
MYEUHD 3 hours ago
Since the model is open-weights, you can get from other providers, for example see https://openrouter.ai/moonshotai/kimi-k3#providers
reply
Alifatisk 3 hours ago
The only downside with third party providers is that you have to trust that the provider have setup and configured it correctly, and is not secretly quantizing it.

See Kimi Vendor Verifier.

reply
usef- 2 hours ago
Plenty of providers on that list aren't fly-by-nights and have easily proven themselves in past models. Jeremy Howard does demos on Fireworks.

A nice thing about open router is you can specify filters, like "US hosting without data retention"

reply
HDBaseT 47 minutes ago
Not at all a marketing gimmick, the demand is simply that high.

I was able to press "Join waitlist" and then within 48 hours got accepted. The limits aren't very high, no where near the endless subsided+resets given on ChatGPT/Claude. I recommend ChatGPT for good value output!

Others here mentioned "the providers could be quantizing it!" but some of the providers on OpenRouter have partnered with Moonshoot and OpenRouter shows the int when you expand on the provider.

It should say "mxfp4" but providers like Baseten report FP8.

reply
Alifatisk 3 hours ago
No, the waiting list is true.

Kimi had become that popular. I was a subscriber of Kimi back when latest version was Kimi K2. Later I unsubscribed because I jumped over to GLM subscription (they had amazing deal). Now when I wanted to try out Kimi K3 to find out what the fuzz was all about, I couldn’t subscribe to them.

I remember reading a post from Moonshot team about this, they are doing this because they are almost at peak capacity and want to reserve it to keep the quality for their current customers.

We are actually witnessing an open-weight model catching up at catching mainstream users attention. And instead of behaving like Anthropic, they actually care about their users experience.

reply
therein 2 hours ago
I wish I could get a Kimi subscription. I'd jump away from Anthropic in a heartbeat.

When they first announced, I created an account but didn't subscribe, so I am stuck on a waitlist now.

reply
InsideOutSanta 3 hours ago
It's an extremely popular model hosted by a company affected by hardware export bans. I doubt they'd voluntarily prevent people from subscribing if they didn't absolutely have to to maintain service quality.
reply
zorked 2 hours ago
I have been using Kimi for months. It did get superslow after the K3 launch, then they blocked signups and normalized the service.

It's not ideal that people can't join but as a user I am happy that they focused on serving existing customers.

reply
try-working 2 hours ago
i've never had any issues with 256k context. see no reason to bump up to 1m if it comes at a premium.
reply
gigatexal 44 minutes ago
Not relevant to this link but I was thinking about the allegations of Chinese AI companies distilling from the big frontier American ones. And I came to the conclusion: I don’t care.

Who cares? China has always copied and then copied the means of production and then out produced. See also Tesla and now all the Chinese cars eating their lunch.

As long as I get really solid AI models for cheap that do what I need I don’t care if they’re Chinese or otherwise.

I’ll still never use Grok from SpaceX AI cuz eww no, I have principles. ;-)

reply
jscott817 2 hours ago
Can we assume that model performance at 90% of the 256k limit != 90% of 1M token limit?

Is this the exact same model just with less VRAM allocated for context window?

reply
jedisct1 3 hours ago
This is a fantastic option for swival.dev given its very efficient context management compared to e.g. Claude Code.
reply
hendersoon 3 hours ago
What is the purpose of this? Just a hard cutoff below the actual context window? You could set that in your harness anyway.
reply
meatmanek 2 hours ago
At least in the self-hosted LLM inference engines, you have to pre-allocate space for the maximum amount of context you want to allow for each parallel session. By using a lower maximum, you don't have to allocate as much VRAM for each session, allowing more usage for the same amount of hardware. Thus, cheaper.
reply
dnlzro 3 hours ago
Uses less quota (i.e., cheaper). For people who like to keep their contexts small, this is a no-brainer.
reply
surgical_fire 3 hours ago
> k3 (1M) consumes about twice as much quota as k3-256k

Cheaper?

reply
chrisweekly 3 hours ago
k3-256 consumes half the quota, so... yes? (assuming the user isn't making use of the larger context window)
reply
sergiotapia 3 hours ago
I can't seem to find pricing for this model. Since the context size is just a quarter of the full size K3, is the price also much cheaper?

I usually keep my context in chats below 256k anyways so this would be tremendous honestly.

reply
daemonologist 3 hours ago
It seems to only be available in Kimi Code, via subscription, no there's no API pricing. The linked page says it consumes about half as much quota as the 1M version though.
reply
superloika 4 hours ago
[flagged]
reply
ibuildproducts 4 hours ago
omg! new model!!
reply
Alifatisk 3 hours ago
Same model, new configuration
reply
holoduke 3 hours ago
A bit of topic. But how likely is it that the US will restrict Chinese open weight models and also force Euro countries to do the same? I think it will be effective within 6 months. The US is having a hard time staying competitive.
reply
jeppebemad 3 hours ago
I don’t know, but I do think that the days of the US “forcing” Euro countries to do anything, is over.
reply
holoduke 3 hours ago
No it's not. The US dictates every single step in Europe. Euro politicians are in the pockets of American institutions. The biggest reason of dumb decisions in the EU is because of deliberate decisions made in favour of the US. LNG, war in Ukraine, ASML export restrictions and many more.
reply
impossiblefork 2 hours ago
It isn't legally possible for them to do this at the EU level. The EU parliament would never vote for it.

For pressure at the country level leading to this kind of thing I think it's very unlikely. Here in Sweden it wouldn't just require a vote in the Swedish parliament and before this there'd have to be förarbeten and you can't just brazenly push things through with insane arguments, Swedish social convention goes against it-- and there's just no way to get it through.

It also might not even be legal. "We aren't at war with China and I'm a communist, and the US LLMs are so aligned with values inimical to my political ideology that this is interference with opinion formation" might be an actual legal argument that the ECHR or CJEU might actually have to accept.

reply
holoduke 2 hours ago
It happened with ASML. What's your thought on it? The US forbid dutch company to export.
reply
impossiblefork 2 hours ago
Well, that's the deal, I assume-- that they weren't allowed to buy the Japanese light source outright, so they bought the American one, even though it required giving the Americans some sort of veto or control.

I guess it sucks if one wants to expert broadly, but if you're big on vertical integration and the Japanese won't sell I guess you take what you can get.

reply
realusername 3 hours ago
Trump burned a lot of bridges in the EU, that one will be a hard sell
reply
periodjet 3 hours ago
Why are Anthropic and OpenAI even allowing their coding harness apps to be plugged into different model providers…? I’m surprised they haven’t figured out a way to clamp down on that by now.
reply
wren6991 3 hours ago
I'd guess because it costs them nothing and it gives you a smoother transition back towards paying for their products.
reply
archildress 3 hours ago
From my view, as soon as they do that, they send people out the door to use Opencode instead - and once many people have a taste of trying every model via Openrouter, it's eye opening as to the possibilities.

Of course - Anthropic and OpenAI have an advantage in the amount they can subsidize the usage, but I think those days are waning.

reply
auspiv 3 hours ago
Well when a huge part of potential revenue is all in on Bedrock... you need the harness to be able to talk to Bedrock. And Vertex. And all the other places these models are hosted. And allow for proxy because many businesses do not all direct internet access... all valid business reasons.
reply
HDBaseT 44 minutes ago
It honestly should be easier, its a by product of everyone using the same API standard.

Codex and Claude require editing a .json file, but most other harnesses have direct connections via a /provider or /login command.

reply