Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Kimi K2.6 vs Phi 4

Kimi K2.6 leads Phi 4 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 27.0 to 5.9, and Phi 4 costs 28.6x less per output token ($0.14 vs $4.00 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 37 benchmarks have a result for both.

Kimi K2.6Moonshot AI
Coding
52.1
Overall
27.0
Output $/M
$4.00
37
Phi 4Microsoft
Coding
No data
Overall
5.9
Output $/M
$0.14
0
vs boards won of 37 shared

Kimi K2.6 or Phi 4: which to pick

Only Kimi K2.6 has a coding score, 52.1 on the Vibe Coding Index; Phi 4 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Phi 4 for output tokens 28.6x cheaper ($0.14 vs $4.00 per million).

Shared results
37
Kimi K2.6 only
72
Phi 4 only
8
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
Kimi K2.6 52.1 from 3 benchmarks, Phi 4 not benchmarked.
Widest category
Agentic work, 95.9 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
τ²-Bench Telecom: Kimi K2.6 95.9% against Phi 4 0.0%, 95.9 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Kimi K2.6 $4.00 against Phi 4 $0.14 per million output tokens, 28.6x apart.
Context window
Kimi K2.6 takes 262K tokens, Phi 4 16K.

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
CategoryKimi K2.6BarsPhi 4Ties
Coding30
Intelligence20
Agentic work10
Reasoning60
Math30
Knowledge40
General180
All shared boards370
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index30
Coding benchmarks for Kimi K2.6 and Phi 4
BenchmarkKimi K2.6Phi 4Leader
LMArena WebDev1509Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
AA Coding Index61.8Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)86.8%Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)76.2%Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)37.9%Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
Code migration (Vals AI)27.8%Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
ProgramBench (Vals AI)0.0%Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)53.6%Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured23.1%Only Phi 4 measured
SciCode51.5%Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)43.9%3.8%Kimi K2.6
WeirdML55.9%Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
ALE-Bench1092.7Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
LMArena Text: coding14891231Kimi K2.6
LMArena Text: software and IT14841228Kimi K2.6
LMArena WebDev: React1505Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML1485Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
LMArena WebDev: from an image1521Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 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 Kimi K2.6 and Phi 4
BenchmarkKimi K2.6Phi 4Leader
AA Intelligence Index27.05.9Kimi K2.6
Epoch Capabilities Index150.9130.5Kimi K2.6
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Agentic work benchmarks for Kimi K2.6 and Phi 4
BenchmarkKimi K2.6Phi 4Leader
AA Agentic Index20.5Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
Design Arena: agents building web apps1268Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
Design Arena: agents building full-stack apps1155Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile apps1157Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
Design Arena: agents building Android apps1160Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
Design Arena: agents building Godot games1120Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
Design Arena: agents building games1141Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
Design Arena: HTML slides1184Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
Design Arena: PowerPoint slides1128Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
Design Arena: spreadsheets1276Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)44.9%Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)12.4%Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)15.9%Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)57.9%Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
τ²-Bench Telecom95.9%0.0%Kimi K2.6
OSWorld 2.04.6%Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
BALROGNot measured11.6%Only Phi 4 measured
Vending-Bench 2$6,205Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 21 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index60
Reasoning benchmarks for Kimi K2.6 and Phi 4
BenchmarkKimi K2.6Phi 4Leader
GPQA Diamond89.1%Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)86.3%Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)91.1%57.5%Kimi K2.6
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)37.5%3.8%Kimi K2.6
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)90.8%56.1%Kimi K2.6
Chess puzzles20.0%Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
Mystery game puzzles18.0%Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
EBR-bench2.4%Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts14701220Kimi K2.6
LMArena Text: expert14911203Kimi K2.6
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English14711230Kimi K2.6
LMArena Vision: diagrams1298Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
LMArena Vision: homework1310Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index30
Math benchmarks for Kimi K2.6 and Phi 4
BenchmarkKimi K2.6Phi 4Leader
AA Math IndexNot measured18.0Only Phi 4 measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured18.0%Only Phi 4 measured
OTIS Mock AIME96.1%13.8%Kimi K2.6
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 357.2%Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
FrontierMath, tier 425.6%Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
ProofBench16.0%Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
MATH level 5Not measured64.9%Only Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: math14741246Kimi K2.6
LMArena Text: mathematical work14801254Kimi K2.6
Neither model has a result on the other 4 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index40
Knowledge benchmarks for Kimi K2.6 and Phi 4
BenchmarkKimi K2.6Phi 4Leader
MMLU Pro87.6%Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)84.7%Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
CaseLaw (Vals AI)61.2%Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)66.7%Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)74.7%Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
MortgageTax (Vals AI)65.8%Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
MedCode (Vals AI)40.1%Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured71.4%Only Phi 4 measured
SimpleQA Verified34.9%Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
MMLUNot measured84.8%Only Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: science14681206Kimi K2.6
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14571202Kimi K2.6
LMArena Text: legal and government14621241Kimi K2.6
LMArena Text: business and finance14451199Kimi K2.6
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Kimi K2.6 and Phi 4
BenchmarkKimi K2.6Phi 4Leader
Design Arena: websites1269Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
Design Arena: UI components1266Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
Design Arena: game dev1251Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
Design Arena: data viz1249Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
Design Arena: 3D1268Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
Design Arena: all code categories1272Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
Design Arena: SVG1181Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
Design Arena: ASCII art1165Not measuredOnly 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 index180
General benchmarks for Kimi K2.6 and Phi 4
BenchmarkKimi K2.6Phi 4Leader
Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI)56.6%Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
SAGE (Vals AI)50.2%Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)78.2%Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
Vals Multimodal Index56.4%Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
IFBench76.0%23.5%Kimi K2.6
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)81.0%0.0%Kimi K2.6
DTBench90.9%Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
LMCA37.3%Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
Creative writing (Lech Mazur)Not measured62.6%Only Phi 4 measured
Furniture assembly21.7%Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
ExploitBench18.4%Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
LMArena Text14551217Kimi K2.6
LMArena Text: instruction following14511201Kimi K2.6
LMArena Text: creative writing14341181Kimi K2.6
LMArena Vision1282Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
LMArena Text: English14601231Kimi K2.6
LMArena Text: non-English14461197Kimi K2.6
LMArena Text: Chinese15201212Kimi K2.6
LMArena Text: German14511222Kimi K2.6
LMArena Text: Japanese14431158Kimi K2.6
LMArena Text: Korean14271151Kimi K2.6
LMArena Text: French14711224Kimi K2.6
LMArena Text: Spanish14641234Kimi K2.6
LMArena Text: Russian14461209Kimi K2.6
LMArena Text: Polish1438Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn14531206Kimi K2.6
LMArena Text: longer queries14681217Kimi K2.6
LMArena Text: writing and language14391198Kimi K2.6
LMArena Text: entertainment and media14281162Kimi K2.6
LMArena Vision: English1287Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
LMArena Vision: Chinese1346Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
LMArena Vision: reading text1291Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
LMArena Vision: humor1280Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
LMArena Vision: creative writing1273Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
LMArena Document1451Not measuredOnly Kimi K2.6 measured
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 Kimi K2.6 and Phi 4
BenchmarkKimi K2.6Phi 4Leader
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

Kimi K2.6$0.0029Fits in one request
Phi 4$0.0001Fits in one request

Phi 4 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Kimi K2.6$0.059Fits in one request
Phi 4$0.0039Exceeds the context window

Phi 4 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Kimi K2.6$0.230Fits in one request
Phi 4$0.015Exceeds the context window

Phi 4 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 Kimi K2.6 and Phi 4
SpecificationMoonshotAI Kimi K2.6Microsoft Phi 4
MakerMoonshot AIMicrosoft
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedApril 20, 2026January 10, 2025
Context window262K16K
Input $/Mtok$0.95$0.07
Output $/Mtok$4.00$0.14
Coding index52.1Not benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it30
Cost per solved task$0.35Not computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Kimi K2.6 better than Phi 4 for coding?

Only Kimi K2.6 has a coding score, 52.1 on the Vibe Coding Index; Phi 4 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Phi 4 for output tokens 28.6x cheaper ($0.14 vs $4.00 per million).

Which is cheaper, Kimi K2.6 or Phi 4?

Kimi K2.6 costs $0.95 per million input tokens and $4.00 per million output tokens; Phi 4 costs $0.07 and $0.14. Cost per solved task is known for Kimi K2.6 only.

Which has the bigger context window, Kimi K2.6 or Phi 4?

Kimi K2.6, with 262K tokens against 16K.

How many benchmarks is the Kimi K2.6 vs Phi 4 comparison based on?

37 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Kimi K2.6's coding index rests on 3 independent benchmarks and Phi 4's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next