Model Comparison

Claude Opus 4.6 vs Kimi K2.6

Claude Opus 4.6 has a slight edge in benchmark performance. Kimi K2.6 is 5.8x cheaper per token.

Want to compare interactively?Try the playground

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

9 benchmarks

Claude Opus 4.6 outperforms in 5 benchmarks (DeepSearchQA, GPQA, Humanity's Last Exam, SWE-bench Multilingual, SWE-Bench Verified), while Kimi K2.6 is better at 4 benchmarks (BrowseComp, CharXiv-R, MMMU-Pro, Terminal-Bench 2.0).

Claude Opus 4.6 has a slight edge in benchmark performance.

Mon Apr 20 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Kimi K2.6 costs less

For input processing, Claude Opus 4.6 ($5.00/1M tokens) is 5.3x more expensive than Kimi K2.6 ($0.95/1M tokens).

For output processing, Claude Opus 4.6 ($25.00/1M tokens) is 6.3x more expensive than Kimi K2.6 ($4.00/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Claude Opus 4.6 is more expensive than Kimi K2.6.*

* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens

Lowest available price from all providers
Mon Apr 20 2026 • llm-stats.com
Anthropic
Claude Opus 4.6
Input tokens$5.00
Output tokens$25.00
Best providerAnthropic
Moonshot AI
Kimi K2.6
Input tokens$0.95
Output tokens$4.00
Best providerUnknown Organization
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Claude Opus 4.6 accepts 1,000,000 input tokens compared to Kimi K2.6's 262,144 tokens. Kimi K2.6 can generate longer responses up to 262,144 tokens, while Claude Opus 4.6 is limited to 128,000 tokens.

Anthropic
Claude Opus 4.6
Input1,000,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Moonshot AI
Kimi K2.6
Input262,144 tokens
Output262,144 tokens
Mon Apr 20 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

Both Claude Opus 4.6 and Kimi K2.6 support multimodal inputs.

They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.

Claude Opus 4.6

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Kimi K2.6

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude Opus 4.6 is licensed under a proprietary license, while Kimi K2.6 uses Modified MIT License.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

Claude Opus 4.6

Proprietary

Closed source

Kimi K2.6

Modified MIT License

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude Opus 4.6 was released on 2026-02-05, while Kimi K2.6 was released on 2026-04-20.

Kimi K2.6 is 2 months newer than Claude Opus 4.6.

Claude Opus 4.6

Feb 5, 2026

2 months ago

Kimi K2.6

Apr 20, 2026

0 days ago

2mo newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.

Unable to compare the recency of their training data.

No cutoff dates available

Provider Availability

Claude Opus 4.6 is available from Anthropic. Kimi K2.6 is available from Moonshot AI, Novita.

Claude Opus 4.6

anthropic logo
Anthropic
Input Price:Input: $5.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $25.00/1M

Kimi K2.6

moonshot logo
Unknown Organization
Input Price:Input: $0.95/1MOutput Price:Output: $4.00/1M
novita logo
Novita
Input Price:Input: $0.95/1MOutput Price:Output: $4.00/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Key Takeaways

Anthropic
Larger context window (1,000,000 tokens)
Higher DeepSearchQA score (91.3% vs 83.0%)
Higher GPQA score (91.3% vs 90.5%)
Higher Humanity's Last Exam score (53.1% vs 36.4%)
Higher SWE-bench Multilingual score (77.8% vs 76.7%)
Higher SWE-Bench Verified score (80.8% vs 80.2%)
Moonshot AI
Less expensive input tokens
Less expensive output tokens
Has open weights
Higher BrowseComp score (86.3% vs 84.0%)
Higher CharXiv-R score (86.7% vs 77.4%)
Higher MMMU-Pro score (80.1% vs 77.3%)
Higher Terminal-Bench 2.0 score (66.7% vs 65.4%)

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
Anthropic
Claude Opus 4.6
Moonshot AI
Kimi K2.6

FAQ

Common questions about Claude Opus 4.6 vs Kimi K2.6

Claude Opus 4.6 has a slight edge in benchmark performance. Claude Opus 4.6 is made by Anthropic and Kimi K2.6 is made by Moonshot AI. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their benchmark scores, pricing, and capabilities above.
Claude Opus 4.6 scores Vending-Bench 2: 100.0%, AIME 2025: 99.8%, Tau2 Telecom: 99.3%, Graphwalks parents >128k: 95.4%, MRCR v2 (8-needle): 93.0%. Kimi K2.6 scores V*: 96.9%, AIME 2026: 96.4%, MathVision: 93.2%, HMMT Feb 26: 92.7%, GPQA: 90.5%.
Kimi K2.6 is 5.3x cheaper for input tokens. Claude Opus 4.6 costs $5.00/M input and $25.00/M output via anthropic. Kimi K2.6 costs $0.95/M input and $4.00/M output via moonshot.
Claude Opus 4.6 supports 1.0M tokens and Kimi K2.6 supports 262K tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.
Key differences include context window (1.0M vs 262K), input pricing ($5.00 vs $0.95/M), licensing (Proprietary vs Modified MIT License). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.
Claude Opus 4.6 is developed by Anthropic and Kimi K2.6 is developed by Moonshot AI.