Model comparison
Gemma 3n E4b IT vs Kimi K2.6
Kimi K2.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.5 to 36.7 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3n E4b IT costs 23× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Kimi K2.6's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 3n E4b IT scores higher in 0 categories and Kimi K2.6 in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Kimi K2.6 leads 56.8 to 32.5.
- Gemma 3n E4b IT is cheaper at $0.06 / $0.12 per million input/output tokens, against $0.95 / $4 for Kimi K2.6.
- Kimi K2.6 accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 33K.
Side by side
| Gemma 3n E4b IT | Kimi K2.6 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Moonshot AI | |
| Noometry Index | 36.7 | 47.5 |
| Released | 2025-05-20 | 2026-04-20 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 33K | 262K |
| Max output | 33K | 262K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.06 | $0.95 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.12 | $4 |
| Results tracked | 18 | 51 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Kimi K2.6 leads
Gemma 3n E4b IT: 36.4 (#193), Kimi K2.6: 50.5 (#41)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3n E4b IT | Kimi K2.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1269 | 1488 |
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 76.7% |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1509 |
| SciCode | — | 53.5% |
| WeirdML | — | 55.9% |
| ALE-Bench | — | 1,093 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemma 3n E4b IT: —, Kimi K2.6: 21.8 (#128)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3n E4b IT | Kimi K2.6 |
|---|---|---|
| OSWorld 2.0 | — | 4.6% |
| ExploitBench | — | 18.4% |
| GBAEval | — | 0.9% |
| GDP.pdf | — | 12% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 6,205 |
Reasoning Kimi K2.6 leads
Gemma 3n E4b IT: 19.2 (#239), Kimi K2.6: 39.6 (#51)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3n E4b IT | Kimi K2.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1284 | 1470 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 31.5% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 87.2% |
| CritPt | — | 8% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 26% |
| EBR-Bench | — | 2.4% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 18% |
| DTBench | — | 90.9% |
| LMCA | — | 37.3% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 151.03 |
Math Kimi K2.6 leads
Gemma 3n E4b IT: 32.5 (#186), Kimi K2.6: 56.8 (#34)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3n E4b IT | Kimi K2.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1251 | 1475 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 57.2% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 25.6% |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | — | 72.9% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 96.1% |
| ProofBench | — | 16% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 39% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 14.6% |
Knowledge Kimi K2.6 leads
Gemma 3n E4b IT: 33.6 (#193), Kimi K2.6: 53.9 (#48)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3n E4b IT | Kimi K2.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1245 | 1491 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 90.8% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 34.9% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 10.8% |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemma 3n E4b IT: —, Kimi K2.6: 31.8 (#95)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3n E4b IT | Kimi K2.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1282 |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | — | 3.9% |
| Furniture Assembly | — | 21.7% |
| LMArena Document | — | 1451 |
Multilingual Kimi K2.6 leads
Gemma 3n E4b IT: 43.5 (#179), Kimi K2.6: 55.1 (#35)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3n E4b IT | Kimi K2.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1285 | 1446 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1310 | 1521 |
| LMArena French | 1330 | 1471 |
| LMArena German | 1312 | 1449 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1274 | 1442 |
| LMArena Korean | 1259 | 1428 |
| LMArena Russian | 1288 | 1446 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1305 | 1463 |
Instruction Following Kimi K2.6 leads
Gemma 3n E4b IT: 66.3 (#205), Kimi K2.6: 76.5 (#40)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3n E4b IT | Kimi K2.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1255 | 1451 |
Long Context Kimi K2.6 leads
Gemma 3n E4b IT: 38.8 (#185), Kimi K2.6: 44.9 (#50)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3n E4b IT | Kimi K2.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1277 | 1468 |
Writing & Preference Kimi K2.6 leads
Gemma 3n E4b IT: 50.3 (#181), Kimi K2.6: 68.7 (#25)
| Benchmark | Gemma 3n E4b IT | Kimi K2.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1306 | 1455 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1287 | 1434 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1276 | 1453 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1725 |
| EQ-Bench 4 | — | 1202 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemma 3n E4b IT better than Kimi K2.6?
Kimi K2.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.5 to 36.7 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3n E4b IT costs 23× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Kimi K2.6's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Gemma 3n E4b IT or Kimi K2.6?
Gemma 3n E4b IT is cheaper. It lists at $0.06 per million input tokens and $0.12 per million output tokens; Kimi K2.6 lists at $0.95 and $4.
Is Gemma 3n E4b IT or Kimi K2.6 better for coding?
Kimi K2.6 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 50.5 versus 36.4 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Kimi K2.6 does, with 262K tokens against 33K.
How many benchmarks do Gemma 3n E4b IT and Kimi K2.6 share?
17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 3n E4b IT has 18 scored results on Noometry and Kimi K2.6 has 51.