kimi-for-coding vs step-3.7-flash speed comparison
Based on 114 anonymous user runs.
Post to social channels, or use Markdown and badges for GitHub/README.
[](https://tokrace.com/en/compare/kimi-for-coding-vs-step-3-7-flash)
· 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.
FAQ
Which model outputs faster, kimi-for-coding or step-3.7-flash?
step-3.7-flash has faster output (median 164 vs 104 tok/s); kimi-for-coding has faster TTFT (1.41s vs 1.50s).
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://tokrace.com/api/badge/compare/kimi-for-coding-vs-step-3-7-flash?locale=en.