Kimi K2.5/K2.6/K2.7-Code 1T · GPU comparison

Kimi K2.5/K2.6/K2.7-Code 1T — H200 vs MI355X

Head-to-head AI inference benchmark comparison of H200 (NVIDIA Hopper) and MI355X (AMD CDNA 4) on Kimi K2.5/K2.6/K2.7-Code 1T. Latency, throughput, and cost across LLM workloads. Use the chart controls below to switch sequences, precisions, and metrics — same interactions as the main inference chart.

Throughput at 46 tok/s/user on Kimi K2.5/K2.6/K2.7-Code 1T: H200 hits 350 tok/s/GPU, MI355X hits 428. Per-million costs land at $1.12 and $0.96 respectively. MI355X is 16% cheaper per token; MI355X delivers 22% more tok/s/GPU.

H200 / MI355X on Kimi K2.5/K2.6/K2.7-Code 1T at 59 tok/s/user: 273 / 298 tok/s/GPU, $1.42 / $1.37 per million tokens. MI355X is 4% cheaper per token; MI355X delivers 9% more tok/s/GPU.

Toward the upper edge of the 34–85 tok/s/user interactivity band, at 72 tok/s/user on Kimi K2.5/K2.6/K2.7-Code 1T: H200 runs 217 tok/s/GPU at $1.79/M tokens, MI355X runs 222 at $1.88/M. H200 is 5% cheaper per token; MI355X delivers 2% more tok/s/GPU. (Numbers reflect the default 1k/1k · int4 selection for this URL — table and chart below update if you change sequence, precision, or model in the controls.)

View performance-per-dollar view →

Interpolated from real benchmark data. Edit target interactivity values below to compare at different operating points.
Metric
Interactivity (tok/s/user)
Interactivity (tok/s/user)
Interactivity (tok/s/user)
Throughput (tok/s/gpu)
H200:350.3MI355X:427.6
H200:272.7MI355X:298.1
H200:216.6MI355X:221.7
Cost ($/M tok)
H200:$1.116MI355X:$0.961
H200:$1.421MI355X:$1.371
H200:$1.795MI355X:$1.879
tok/s/MW
H200:202502MI355X:161361
H200:157639MI355X:112503
H200:125187MI355X:83662
Concurrency
H200:~31MI355X:~19
H200:~19MI355X:~10
H200:~12MI355X:~6

Inference Performance

Inference performance metrics across different models, hardware configurations, and serving parameters.

Vendor:
Aggregation:
Spec Decoding: