Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Claude Opus 4.7 vs Kimi K2.6

Claude Opus 4.7 leads Kimi K2.6 on coding, 67.5 to 52.1 on the Vibe Coding Index, and Kimi K2.6 costs 6.3x less per output token ($4.00 vs $25.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 89 benchmarks have a result for both.

Replace Claude Opus 4.7 Replace Kimi K2.6
Claude Opus 4.7Anthropic
Coding
67.5
Overall
71.6
Output $/M
$25.00
81
Kimi K2.6Moonshot AI
Coding
52.1
Overall
60.5
Output $/M
$4.00
7
vs boards won of 89 shared, 1 tied

Claude Opus 4.7 or Kimi K2.6: which to pick

Pick Claude Opus 4.7 for coding: it scores 67.5 on the Vibe Coding Index against 52.1 for Kimi K2.6.

Pick Kimi K2.6 for output tokens 6.3x cheaper ($4.00 vs $25.00 per million) and a lower cost per solved task ($0.35 against $2.95).

Model AClaude Opus 4.7Anthropic67.5/1004 independent benchmarks$2.95 per solved taskModel BKimi K2.6Moonshot AI52.1/1003 independent benchmarks$0.35 per solved task
Shared results
89
Claude Opus 4.7 only
14
Kimi K2.6 only
20
Like-for-like categories
7 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.

At a glance

Coding index
Claude Opus 4.7 67.5 from 4 benchmarks, Kimi K2.6 52.1 from 3 benchmarks.
Widest category
Agentic work, 14.4 points apart on average over 8 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
ProofBench: Claude Opus 4.7 54.0% against Kimi K2.6 16.0%, 38.0 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Claude Opus 4.7 $25.00 against Kimi K2.6 $4.00 per million output tokens, 6.3x apart.
Context window
Claude Opus 4.7 takes 1M tokens, Kimi K2.6 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
CategoryClaude Opus 4.7BarsKimi K2.6Ties
Coding1311 tie
Intelligence20
Agentic work71
Reasoning112
Math60
Knowledge111
General312
All shared boards8171 tie
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index131
Coding benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.7 and Kimi K2.6
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Kimi K2.6Leader
LMArena WebDev15581509Claude Opus 4.7
AA Coding Index73.661.8Claude Opus 4.7
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)85.1%86.8%Kimi K2.6
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)82.0%76.2%Claude Opus 4.7
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)71.0%37.9%Claude Opus 4.7
Code migration (Vals AI)43.9%27.8%Claude Opus 4.7
ProgramBench (Vals AI)0.0%0.0%Tie
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)68.5%53.6%Claude Opus 4.7
SciCodeNot measured51.5%Only Kimi K2.6 measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)54.5%43.9%Claude Opus 4.7
Terminal-Bench80.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.7 measured
FrontierCode38.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.7 measured
GSO-Bench44.1%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.7 measured
WeirdML76.4%55.9%Claude Opus 4.7
MirrorCode31.1%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.7 measured
ALE-BenchNot measured1092.7Only Kimi K2.6 measured
LMArena Text: coding15191489Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Text: software and IT15161484Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena WebDev: React15601505Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena WebDev: HTML15541485Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena WebDev: from an image15771521Claude Opus 4.7
Neither model has a result on the other 18 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Intelligence benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.7 and Kimi K2.6
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Kimi K2.6Leader
AA Intelligence Index40.727.0Claude Opus 4.7
Epoch Capabilities Index156.8150.9Claude Opus 4.7
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index71
Agentic work benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.7 and Kimi K2.6
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Kimi K2.6Leader
AA Agentic Index38.620.5Claude Opus 4.7
Design Arena: agents building web appsNot measured1268Only Kimi K2.6 measured
Design Arena: agents building full-stack appsNot measured1155Only Kimi K2.6 measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile appsNot measured1156Only Kimi K2.6 measured
Design Arena: agents building Android appsNot measured1161Only Kimi K2.6 measured
Design Arena: agents building Godot gamesNot measured1120Only Kimi K2.6 measured
Design Arena: agents building gamesNot measured1141Only Kimi K2.6 measured
Design Arena: HTML slidesNot measured1135Only Kimi K2.6 measured
Design Arena: PowerPoint slidesNot measured1103Only Kimi K2.6 measured
Design Arena: spreadsheetsNot measured1276Only Kimi K2.6 measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)51.5%44.9%Claude Opus 4.7
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)23.7%12.4%Claude Opus 4.7
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)38.5%15.9%Claude Opus 4.7
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)63.7%57.9%Claude Opus 4.7
τ²-Bench Telecom88.6%95.9%Kimi K2.6
APEX-Agents49.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.7 measured
OSWorld 2.018.2%4.6%Claude Opus 4.7
PostTrainBench28.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.7 measured
Vending-Bench 2$10,937$6,205Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Search1230Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.7 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 21 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index112
Reasoning benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.7 and Kimi K2.6
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Kimi K2.6Leader
GPQA Diamond90.2%89.1%Claude Opus 4.7
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)85.5%86.3%Kimi K2.6
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)91.4%91.1%Claude Opus 4.7
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)42.3%37.5%Claude Opus 4.7
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)90.2%90.8%Kimi K2.6
ARC-AGI93.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.7 measured
ARC-AGI-275.8%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.7 measured
SimpleBench61.7%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.7 measured
Chess puzzles41.0%20.0%Claude Opus 4.7
Mystery game puzzles28.0%18.0%Claude Opus 4.7
EBR-bench19.0%2.4%Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Text: hard prompts15061470Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Text: expert15211491Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English15081471Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Vision: diagrams13361298Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Vision: homework13371310Claude Opus 4.7
Kagi LLM Benchmark80.7%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.7 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index60
Math benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.7 and Kimi K2.6
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Kimi K2.6Leader
AIME96.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.7 measured
OTIS Mock AIME97.8%96.1%Claude Opus 4.7
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 370.2%57.2%Claude Opus 4.7
FrontierMath, tier 431.7%25.6%Claude Opus 4.7
ProofBench54.0%16.0%Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Text: math14981474Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Text: mathematical work15091480Claude Opus 4.7
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index111
Knowledge benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.7 and Kimi K2.6
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Kimi K2.6Leader
MMLU Pro89.9%87.6%Claude Opus 4.7
LegalBench (Vals AI)85.3%84.7%Claude Opus 4.7
CaseLaw (Vals AI)68.4%61.2%Claude Opus 4.7
CorpFin (Vals AI)66.1%66.7%Kimi K2.6
TaxEval (Vals AI)75.3%74.7%Claude Opus 4.7
MortgageTax (Vals AI)70.3%65.8%Claude Opus 4.7
MedCode (Vals AI)54.9%40.1%Claude Opus 4.7
SimpleQA Verified51.7%34.9%Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Text: science15081468Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14951457Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Text: legal and government15041462Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Text: business and finance14901445Claude Opus 4.7
FACTS Benchmark Suite45.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.7 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.7 and Kimi K2.6
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Kimi K2.6Leader
Design Arena: websitesNot measured1268Only Kimi K2.6 measured
Design Arena: UI componentsNot measured1263Only Kimi K2.6 measured
Design Arena: game devNot measured1250Only Kimi K2.6 measured
Design Arena: data vizNot measured1249Only Kimi K2.6 measured
Design Arena: 3DNot measured1267Only Kimi K2.6 measured
Design Arena: all code categoriesNot measured1271Only Kimi K2.6 measured
Design Arena: SVGNot measured1181Only Kimi K2.6 measured
Design Arena: ASCII artNot measured1165Only Kimi K2.6 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index312
General benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.7 and Kimi K2.6
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Kimi K2.6Leader
Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI)Not measured56.6%Only Kimi K2.6 measured
SAGE (Vals AI)56.1%50.2%Claude Opus 4.7
MedScribe (Vals AI)83.0%78.2%Claude Opus 4.7
Vals Multimodal Index67.4%56.4%Claude Opus 4.7
IFBench58.6%76.0%Kimi K2.6
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)78.7%81.0%Kimi K2.6
DTBench94.7%90.9%Claude Opus 4.7
LMCA52.2%37.3%Claude Opus 4.7
Furniture assembly33.3%21.7%Claude Opus 4.7
ExploitBench26.5%18.4%Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Text14901455Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Text: instruction following14981451Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Text: creative writing14861434Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Vision13171282Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Text: English14961460Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Text: non-English14801446Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Text: Chinese15311520Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Text: German14951451Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Text: Japanese14741443Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Text: Korean14641427Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Text: French15031471Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Text: Spanish14941464Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Text: Russian14941446Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Text: Polish14891438Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Text: multi-turn15051453Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Text: longer queries15051468Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Text: writing and language14921439Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Text: entertainment and media14741428Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Vision: English13221287Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Vision: Chinese13711346Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Vision: reading text13271291Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Vision: humor13091280Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Vision: recognizing things1278Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.7 measured
LMArena Vision: creative writing13261273Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Document14951451Claude Opus 4.7
Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.7 and Kimi K2.6
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Kimi K2.6Leader
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 4.7$0.018Fits in one request
Kimi K2.6$0.0029Fits in one request

Kimi K2.6 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Claude Opus 4.7$0.325Fits in one request
Kimi K2.6$0.059Fits in one request

Kimi K2.6 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Claude Opus 4.7$1.25Fits in one request
Kimi K2.6$0.230Fits in one request

Kimi K2.6 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 4.7 and Kimi K2.6
SpecificationAnthropic Claude Opus 4.7MoonshotAI Kimi K2.6
MakerAnthropicMoonshot AI
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedApril 16, 2026April 20, 2026
Context window1M262K
Input $/Mtok$5.00$0.95
Output $/Mtok$25.00$4.00
Coding index67.552.1
Independent measurements behind it43
Cost per solved task$2.95$0.35
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Claude Opus 4.7 better than Kimi K2.6 for coding?

Pick Claude Opus 4.7 for coding: it scores 67.5 on the Vibe Coding Index against 52.1 for Kimi K2.6. Pick Kimi K2.6 for output tokens 6.3x cheaper ($4.00 vs $25.00 per million) and a lower cost per solved task ($0.35 against $2.95).

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.7 or Kimi K2.6?

Claude Opus 4.7 costs $5.00 per million input tokens and $25.00 per million output tokens; Kimi K2.6 costs $0.95 and $4.00. Per solved SWE-bench Verified task, Claude Opus 4.7 costs $2.95 and Kimi K2.6 $0.35.

Which has the bigger context window, Claude Opus 4.7 or Kimi K2.6?

Claude Opus 4.7, with 1M tokens against 262K.

How many benchmarks is the Claude Opus 4.7 vs Kimi K2.6 comparison based on?

89 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Claude Opus 4.7's coding index rests on 4 independent benchmarks and Kimi K2.6's on 3. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next

Embed this comparison on your site

Free under CC BY 4.0, while the source link stays visible. Preview the frame · Terms and other embeds

<iframe src="https://llmbenchmark.ai/embed/compare/claude-opus-4-7-vs-kimi-k2-6" title="Claude Opus 4.7 vs Kimi K2.6, LLMBenchmark.ai" width="100%" height="360" style="border:0;max-width:100%" loading="lazy"></iframe>
<p style="font:13px/1.4 sans-serif;margin:6px 0 0">Source: <a href="https://llmbenchmark.ai/compare/claude-opus-4-7-vs-kimi-k2-6">LLMBenchmark.ai, Claude Opus 4.7 vs Kimi K2.6</a></p>