OpenAI compatible API · Attested · Public status

ibm-granite/granite-4.2-30b vs MoonshotAI: Kimi K3

ibm-granite/granite-4.2-30b vs MoonshotAI: Kimi K3: compare current API pricing, context, provider routes, privacy, p50 latency, and OpenAI-compatible access.

Verify gateway

Onebase URL to migrate

100sof models and routes

0prompt or output logs. Always.

Compare routesProviders, price, context, and policy posture in one view.

Use auto when uptime mattersKeep a primary model and let fallback handle provider failures.

Same API shapeUse the OpenAI client and set the model you want.

Practical read

Monthly evidence

ibm-granite/granite-4.2-30b has the lower cheapest prompt+completion route on TrustedRouter. MoonshotAI: Kimi K3 has more provider fallback routes, while MoonshotAI: Kimi K3 has the larger context window. Current TrustedRouter probes show ibm-granite/granite-4.2-30b with the lower p50 TTFT.

$0.85455/1Mibm-granite/granite-4.2-30b cheapest route

$12.3435/1MMoonshotAI: Kimi K3 cheapest route

788 msibm-granite/granite-4.2-30b fastest measured p50 TTFT via deepinfra

809 msMoonshotAI: Kimi K3 fastest measured p50 TTFT via deepinfra

Prices and live route measurements can change. Use the monthly reports when you need a stable evidence window, then run a small task-specific eval before choosing a production default.

ibm-granite/granite-4.2-30bMoonshotAI: Kimi K3

Model idibm-granite/granite-4.2-30bmoonshotai/kimi-k3

Publisher DeepInfra Kimi

AI IQ — IQ 121#27

Context131,072 tokens1,048,576 tokens

Credits provider routes124

Cheapest route$0.85455/1M$12.3435/1M

Cached input$0.0422/1M$0.205725/1M to $1.693275/1M

Privacy postureprovider posture varieshas provider E2EE route

Fastest measured p50 TTFT788 ms via deepinfra809 ms via deepinfra

Highest measured throughputnot enough datanot enough data

Recent route uptime range100.00%0.00% to 100.00%

Modes chat chat

ibm-granite/granite-4.2-30b routes

Overview1 Credits routes

MoonshotAI: Kimi K3 routes

Overview24 Credits routes
PricingInput, cached input, and output rates
ProvidersAll serving providers

Related comparisons

Browse every comparison

MoonshotAI: Kimi K3 vs Z.ai: GLM 5.252 combined provider routes
MoonshotAI: Kimi K3 vs Z.ai: GLM 5.350 combined provider routes
MoonshotAI: Kimi K3 vs Z.ai: GLM 5.3 Flash50 combined provider routes
DeepSeek: DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 vs MoonshotAI: Kimi K348 combined provider routes
MoonshotAI: Kimi K3 vs OpenAI: gpt-oss-120b46 combined provider routes
MoonshotAI: Kimi K2.6 vs MoonshotAI: Kimi K344 combined provider routes
DeepSeek: DeepSeek V4 Flash 0423 vs MoonshotAI: Kimi K341 combined provider routes
DeepSeek: DeepSeek V4 Pro 0423 vs MoonshotAI: Kimi K340 combined provider routes

Production choice

Pick a default model. Keep fallback enabled.

TrustedRouter is useful when you know the model you want, but still need provider rollover, budget limits, usage records, and a prompt path you can verify.

OpenAI clientPython

client = OpenAI(
    base_url="https://api.trustedrouter.com/v1",
    api_key="sk-tr-v1-..."
)

response = client.chat.completions.create(
    model="ibm-granite/granite-4.2-30b",
    messages=messages,
)

Questions

Which should I use, ibm-granite/granite-4.2-30b or MoonshotAI: Kimi K3?

Is ibm-granite/granite-4.2-30b or MoonshotAI: Kimi K3 cheaper?

The current cheapest TrustedRouter route is $0.85455/1M for ibm-granite/granite-4.2-30b and $12.3435/1M for MoonshotAI: Kimi K3. The comparison uses current catalog prices and updates as provider pricing changes.

Is ibm-granite/granite-4.2-30b or MoonshotAI: Kimi K3 faster?

Current measured p50 time to first token is 788 ms for ibm-granite/granite-4.2-30b and 809 ms for MoonshotAI: Kimi K3. These are routed probe measurements, not vendor-advertised speeds, and update as new samples arrive.

Can I test ibm-granite/granite-4.2-30b and MoonshotAI: Kimi K3 with the same API?

Yes. Use the same OpenAI-compatible TrustedRouter base URL and API key, then change only the model id between ibm-granite/granite-4.2-30b and moonshotai/kimi-k3. This makes side-by-side evals possible without maintaining two provider integrations.