OpenAI compatible API · Attested · Public status

MoonshotAI: Kimi K2.7 Code vs Recraft V4.1 Utility

MoonshotAI: Kimi K2.7 Code vs Recraft V4.1 Utility: 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

Recraft V4.1 Utility has the lower cheapest prompt+completion route on TrustedRouter. MoonshotAI: Kimi K2.7 Code has more provider fallback routes, while MoonshotAI: Kimi K2.7 Code has the larger context window. Probe-backed speed data is shown when enough recent samples exist.

$4.29385/1MMoonshotAI: Kimi K2.7 Code cheapest route

selected routeRecraft V4.1 Utility cheapest route

908 msMoonshotAI: Kimi K2.7 Code fastest measured p50 TTFT via parasail

not enough dataRecraft V4.1 Utility fastest measured p50 TTFT

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.

MoonshotAI: Kimi K2.7 CodeRecraft V4.1 Utility

Model idmoonshotai/kimi-k2.7-coderecraft/recraftv4_1_utility

Publisher Kimi Recraft

AI IQ IQ 118#29 —

Context262,144 tokens0 tokens

Provider routes211

Cheapest route$4.29385/1Mselected route

Privacy posturehas ZDR routeprovider posture varies

Fastest measured p50 TTFT908 ms via parasailnot enough data

Highest measured throughputnot enough datanot enough data

Recent route uptime range100.00%not enough data

Modes chat

MoonshotAI: Kimi K2.7 Code routes

Overview21 endpoints
PricingPrompt and completion rates
BenchmarksTrustedRouter and external sources
ProvidersAll serving providers

Recraft V4.1 Utility routes

Overview1 endpoints

Related comparisons

Browse every comparison

MoonshotAI: Kimi K2.7 Code vs Z.ai: GLM 5.273 combined provider routes
MoonshotAI: Kimi K2.7 Code vs MoonshotAI: Kimi K358 combined provider routes
DeepSeek: DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 vs MoonshotAI: Kimi K2.7 Code54 combined provider routes
MoonshotAI: Kimi K2.6 vs MoonshotAI: Kimi K2.7 Code52 combined provider routes
MoonshotAI: Kimi K2.7 Code vs OpenAI: gpt-oss-120b52 combined provider routes
DeepSeek: DeepSeek V4 Flash 0423 vs MoonshotAI: Kimi K2.7 Code50 combined provider routes
DeepSeek: DeepSeek V4 Pro 0423 vs MoonshotAI: Kimi K2.7 Code49 combined provider routes
Google: Gemma 4 31B vs MoonshotAI: Kimi K2.7 Code48 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="moonshotai/kimi-k2.7-code",
    messages=messages,
)

Questions

Which should I use, MoonshotAI: Kimi K2.7 Code or Recraft V4.1 Utility?

Is MoonshotAI: Kimi K2.7 Code or Recraft V4.1 Utility cheaper?

The current cheapest TrustedRouter route is $4.29385/1M for MoonshotAI: Kimi K2.7 Code and selected route for Recraft V4.1 Utility. The comparison uses current catalog prices and updates as provider pricing changes.

Is MoonshotAI: Kimi K2.7 Code or Recraft V4.1 Utility faster?

Current measured p50 time to first token is 908 ms for MoonshotAI: Kimi K2.7 Code and not enough data for Recraft V4.1 Utility. These are routed probe measurements, not vendor-advertised speeds, and update as new samples arrive.

Can I test MoonshotAI: Kimi K2.7 Code and Recraft V4.1 Utility with the same API?

Yes. Use the same OpenAI-compatible TrustedRouter base URL and API key, then change only the model id between moonshotai/kimi-k2.7-code and recraft/recraftv4_1_utility. This makes side-by-side evals possible without maintaining two provider integrations.