k3 vs step-3.7-flash speed comparison

Based on 71 anonymous user runs.

Verdict: step-3.7-flash has faster output (median 170 vs 33 tok/s); step-3.7-flash has faster TTFT (1.99s vs 4.61s).
Share and embed

Post to social channels, or use Markdown and badges for GitHub/README.

XFacebook微博LinkedIn
[![step-3.7-flash is faster than k3: 170 tok/s on TOKRACE](https://www.tokrace.com/api/badge/compare/k3-vs-step-3-7-flash?locale=en)](https://www.tokrace.com/en/compare/k3-vs-step-3-7-flash)
Median output tok/s33170
Average output tok/s33178
TTFT4.61s1.99s
Peak tok/s1572,067
Samples269

· Data comes from voluntary anonymous sharing; medians reduce jitter · Updates every 5 minutes

· Speed is affected by network, time of day and provider load · Methodology

How to use this comparison

Writing/long output: Prioritize median output tok/s and peak speed.

Chat/agents: TTFT usually has a bigger UX impact.

Model selection: Rerun your real Prompt and inspect output quality too.

Run with current dataView full leaderboard

FAQ

Which model outputs faster, k3 or step-3.7-flash?

step-3.7-flash has faster output (median 170 vs 33 tok/s); step-3.7-flash has faster TTFT (1.99s vs 4.61s).

Why can output speed and TTFT have different winners?

Output tok/s measures sustained generation speed, while TTFT measures the wait until the first token. A model can generate long text faster while still taking longer to start.

How should I rerun this comparison?

Use the arena with the same Prompt, temperature and network conditions, then repeat a few times and combine the speed data with output quality.

Can I embed this comparison in GitHub or an article?

Yes. This page provides Markdown and HTML badges. The badge image URL is https://www.tokrace.com/api/badge/compare/k3-vs-step-3-7-flash?locale=en.