Claude Opus 4.6 vs Kimi K2 Thinking

Claude Opus 4.6 leads Kimi K2 Thinking on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 31.9 to 22.0, and Kimi K2 Thinking costs 10.0x less per output token ($2.50 vs $25.00 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 24 benchmarks have a result for both.

Replace Claude Opus 4.6 Replace Kimi K2 Thinking

Claude Opus 4.6Anthropic

Coding: 57.2
Overall: 66.0
Output $/M: $25.00

Kimi K2 ThinkingMoonshot AI

Coding: No data
Overall: No data
Output $/M: $2.50

vs boards won of 24 shared

Claude Opus 4.6 or Kimi K2 Thinking: which to pick

Only Claude Opus 4.6 has a coding score, 57.2 on the Vibe Coding Index; Kimi K2 Thinking has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Kimi K2 Thinking for output tokens 10.0x cheaper ($2.50 vs $25.00 per million) and a lower cost per solved task ($0.61 against $1.56).

Model AClaude Opus 4.6Anthropic57.2/1004 independent benchmarks$1.56 per solved task Model BKimi K2 ThinkingMoonshot AINot benchmarked1 independent benchmark$0.61 per solved task

24866

Shared results: 24
Claude Opus 4.6 only: 86
Kimi K2 Thinking only: 6
Like-for-like categories: 8 of 9

Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.

Which one for your work

Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.

Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Only Claude Opus 4.6 has a coding score, so no call is made.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
Claude Opus 4.6
Claude Opus 4.6 leads, 31.9 against 22.0.
Same board, both measured
Reasoning
GPQA Diamond
Claude Opus 4.6
Claude Opus 4.6 leads, 89.7% against 78.5%.
Same board, both measured
Math
AIME
Claude Opus 4.6
Claude Opus 4.6 leads, 95.6% against 85.4%.
Same board, both measured
Knowledge
MMLU Pro
Claude Opus 4.6
Claude Opus 4.6 leads, 89.1% against 81.1%.
Same board, both measured
Web design
Design Arena: websites
Claude Opus 4.6
Claude Opus 4.6 leads, 1291 against 1113.
Same board, both measured
Long documents
Listed context window
Claude Opus 4.6
Claude Opus 4.6 takes 1M tokens against 262K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Kimi K2 Thinking
Claude Opus 4.6 $0.018, Kimi K2 Thinking $0.0019 per turn.
List prices
Cost per solved task
One SWE-bench Verified task, solved
Kimi K2 Thinking
Claude Opus 4.6 $1.56, Kimi K2 Thinking $0.61.
Published attempt cost and pass rate

At a glance

Coding index: Claude Opus 4.6 57.2 from 4 benchmarks, Kimi K2 Thinking not benchmarked.
Widest category: Coding, 24.7 points apart on average over 6 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap: Terminal-Bench: Claude Opus 4.6 79.8% against Kimi K2 Thinking 35.7%, 44.1 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price: Claude Opus 4.6 $25.00 against Kimi K2 Thinking $2.50 per million output tokens, 10.0x apart.
Context window: Claude Opus 4.6 takes 1M tokens, Kimi K2 Thinking 262K.

Benchmark by benchmark

First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.

Boards won, where both have a result
Category	Claude Opus 4.6	Kimi K2 Thinking
Coding	6	0
Intelligence	2	0
Agentic work	1	1
Reasoning	3	0
Math	1	0
Knowledge	5	1
Web design	1	0
General	2	1
All shared boards	21	3

CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index60

Coding benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.6 and Kimi K2 Thinking
Benchmark	Claude Opus 4.6	Kimi K2 Thinking	Leader
SWE-bench Verified	75.6%	63.4%	Claude Opus 4.6
SWE-bench Multilingual	72.0%	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena WebDev	1547	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)	84.7%	63.1%	Claude Opus 4.6
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)	78.2%	60.2%	Claude Opus 4.6
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)	57.6%	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)	Not measured	85.3%	Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)	48.5%	31.1%	Claude Opus 4.6
Terminal-Bench	79.8%	35.7%	Claude Opus 4.6
FrontierCode	26.6%	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
GSO-Bench	41.2%	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
WeirdML	78.0%	42.8%	Claude Opus 4.6
Cybench	93.0%	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
ALE-Bench	Not measured	597.5	Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured
LMArena Text: coding	1534	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: software and IT	1527	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena WebDev: React	1539	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML	1559	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena WebDev: from an image	1543	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 20 boards here

IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20

Intelligence benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.6 and Kimi K2 Thinking
Benchmark	Claude Opus 4.6	Kimi K2 Thinking	Leader
AA Intelligence Index	31.9	22.0	Claude Opus 4.6
Epoch Capabilities Index	155.7	145.8	Claude Opus 4.6

Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index11

Agentic work benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.6 and Kimi K2 Thinking
Benchmark	Claude Opus 4.6	Kimi K2 Thinking	Leader
Design Arena: agents building web apps	1206	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
Design Arena: agents building full-stack apps	1220	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile apps	1207	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
Design Arena: agents building Android apps	1196	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
Design Arena: agents building games	1212	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
τ²-Bench Telecom	92.1%	93.0%	Kimi K2 Thinking
APEX-Agents	46.3%	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
METR time horizons	78.9%	59.2%	Claude Opus 4.6
Remote Labor Index	4.2%	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
DeepResearch Bench	55.3%	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
Vending-Bench 2	$8,018	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 30 boards here

ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index30

Reasoning benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.6 and Kimi K2 Thinking
Benchmark	Claude Opus 4.6	Kimi K2 Thinking	Leader
GPQA Diamond	89.7%	78.5%	Claude Opus 4.6
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)	83.9%	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)	89.6%	83.8%	Claude Opus 4.6
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)	39.9%	23.8%	Claude Opus 4.6
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)	90.5%	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
ARC-AGI	94.0%	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
ARC-AGI-2	69.2%	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
SimpleBench	67.6%	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
Chess puzzles	21.0%	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
Mystery game puzzles	25.0%	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
EBR-bench	12.7%	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts	1525	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: expert	1544	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English	1530	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Vision: diagrams	1340	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Vision: homework	1337	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
Kagi LLM Benchmark	83.6%	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here

MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10

Math benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.6 and Kimi K2 Thinking
Benchmark	Claude Opus 4.6	Kimi K2 Thinking	Leader
AIME	95.6%	85.4%	Claude Opus 4.6
MGSM (Vals AI)	Not measured	90.2%	Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured
AA Math Index	Not measured	94.7	Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)	Not measured	94.7%	Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured
OTIS Mock AIME	94.4%	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3	66.0%	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
FrontierMath, tier 4	26.8%	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
ProofBench	50.0%	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: math	1518	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work	1525	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here

KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index51

Knowledge benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.6 and Kimi K2 Thinking
Benchmark	Claude Opus 4.6	Kimi K2 Thinking	Leader
MMLU Pro	89.1%	81.1%	Claude Opus 4.6
LegalBench (Vals AI)	85.3%	80.2%	Claude Opus 4.6
CaseLaw (Vals AI)	62.1%	65.7%	Kimi K2 Thinking
CorpFin (Vals AI)	67.0%	60.6%	Claude Opus 4.6
TaxEval (Vals AI)	76.0%	71.7%	Claude Opus 4.6
MortgageTax (Vals AI)	68.5%	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
MedQA (Vals AI)	95.4%	92.6%	Claude Opus 4.6
MedCode (Vals AI)	49.1%	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)	Not measured	84.8%	Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured
SimpleQA Verified	47.0%	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: science	1519	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare	1504	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: legal and government	1512	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: business and finance	1497	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
FACTS Benchmark Suite	41.5%	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here

Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10

Web design benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.6 and Kimi K2 Thinking
Benchmark	Claude Opus 4.6	Kimi K2 Thinking	Leader
Design Arena: websites	1291	1113	Claude Opus 4.6
Design Arena: UI components	1284	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
Design Arena: game dev	1278	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
Design Arena: data viz	1279	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
Design Arena: 3D	1274	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
Design Arena: all code categories	1289	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
Design Arena: SVG	1228	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
Design Arena: ASCII art	1255	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here

GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index21

General benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.6 and Kimi K2 Thinking
Benchmark	Claude Opus 4.6	Kimi K2 Thinking	Leader
SAGE (Vals AI)	51.6%	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)	86.7%	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
IFBench	53.1%	68.1%	Kimi K2 Thinking
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)	78.0%	72.0%	Claude Opus 4.6
DTBench	91.2%	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMCA	55.8%	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
CL-bench	20.7%	17.6%	Claude Opus 4.6
Furniture assembly	28.3%	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
CL-bench Life	17.0%	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Text	1501	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: instruction following	1521	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: creative writing	1505	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Vision	1316	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: English	1511	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: non-English	1488	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: Chinese	1551	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: German	1500	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: Japanese	1488	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: Korean	1464	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: French	1512	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: Spanish	1510	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: Russian	1497	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: Polish	1499	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn	1511	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: longer queries	1518	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: writing and language	1502	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media	1492	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Vision: English	1324	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Vision: Chinese	1370	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Vision: reading text	1326	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Vision: humor	1314	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Vision: recognizing things	1274	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Vision: creative writing	1331	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
LMArena Document	1507	Not measured	Only Claude Opus 4.6 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here

Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared

Image generation benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.6 and Kimi K2 Thinking
Benchmark	Claude Opus 4.6	Kimi K2 Thinking	Leader
Neither model has a result on 5 boards here

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.

Chat turn

1K input + 500 output tokens

Claude Opus 4.6$0.018Fits in one request

Kimi K2 Thinking$0.0019Fits in one request

Kimi K2 Thinking costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Claude Opus 4.6$0.325Fits in one request

Kimi K2 Thinking$0.037Fits in one request

Kimi K2 Thinking costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Claude Opus 4.6$1.25Fits in one request

Kimi K2 Thinking$0.145Fits in one request

Kimi K2 Thinking costs less

Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.

Specification differences

The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.

Specifications of Claude Opus 4.6 and Kimi K2 Thinking
Specification	Anthropic Claude Opus 4.6	MoonshotAI Kimi K2 Thinking
Maker	Anthropic	Moonshot AI
Weights	No public weights listed	Open weights
Released	February 4, 2026	November 6, 2025
Context window	1M	262K
Input $/Mtok	$5.00	$0.60
Output $/Mtok	$25.00	$2.50
Coding index	57.2	Not benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it	4	1
Cost per solved task	$1.56	$0.61
Source	OpenRouter listing	OpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Claude Opus 4.6 better than Kimi K2 Thinking for coding?

Only Claude Opus 4.6 has a coding score, 57.2 on the Vibe Coding Index; Kimi K2 Thinking has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Kimi K2 Thinking for output tokens 10.0x cheaper ($2.50 vs $25.00 per million) and a lower cost per solved task ($0.61 against $1.56).

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.6 or Kimi K2 Thinking?

Claude Opus 4.6 costs $5.00 per million input tokens and $25.00 per million output tokens; Kimi K2 Thinking costs $0.60 and $2.50. Per solved SWE-bench Verified task, Claude Opus 4.6 costs $1.56 and Kimi K2 Thinking $0.61.

Which has the bigger context window, Claude Opus 4.6 or Kimi K2 Thinking?

Claude Opus 4.6, with 1M tokens against 262K.

How many benchmarks is the Claude Opus 4.6 vs Kimi K2 Thinking comparison based on?

24 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Claude Opus 4.6's coding index rests on 4 independent benchmarks and Kimi K2 Thinking's on 1. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Claude Opus 4.6 or Kimi K2 Thinking: which to pick

Which one for your work

Coding

Intelligence

Reasoning

Math

Knowledge

Web design

Long documents

Everyday cost

Cost per solved task

At a glance

Benchmark by benchmark

What each workload costs

Chat turn

Repository review

Agent loop

Specification differences

Questions

Compare next