Model comparison
GPT-6.1 Sol vs Kimi K2.6
GPT-6.1 Sol is the stronger model overall, scoring 65.6 to 47.7 on the Noometry Index. Kimi K2.6 costs 2.3× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-6.1 Sol's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 29 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 29 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-6.1 Sol scores higher in 7 categories and Kimi K2.6 in 3 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where GPT-6.1 Sol leads 81.9 to 40.5.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is ProofBench: 99% for GPT-6.1 Sol and 16% for Kimi K2.6.
- Kimi K2.6 is cheaper at $0.95 / $4 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $10 for GPT-6.1 Sol.
- GPT-6.1 Sol accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 262K.
- Kimi K2.6 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| GPT-6.1 Sol | Kimi K2.6 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Moonshot AI |
| Noometry Index | 65.6 | 47.7 |
| Released | 2026-09-29 | 2026-04-20 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 1.05M | 262K |
| Max output | 128K | 262K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $2 | $0.95 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $10 | $4 |
| Results tracked | 34 | 51 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GPT-6.1 Sol leads
GPT-6.1 Sol: 63.2 (#8), Kimi K2.6: 50.7 (#43)
| Benchmark | GPT-6.1 Sol | Kimi K2.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1755 | 1509 |
| SciCode | 55.8% | 53.5% |
| LMArena Coding | 1487 | 1488 |
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 76.7% |
| DeepSWE | 75.2% | — |
| FrontierCode | 50.2% | — |
| WeirdML | — | 55.9% |
| ALE-Bench | — | 1,093 |
Agentic & Tool Use GPT-6.1 Sol leads
GPT-6.1 Sol: 39.6 (#26), Kimi K2.6: 21.9 (#137)
| Benchmark | GPT-6.1 Sol | Kimi K2.6 |
|---|---|---|
| GDP.pdf | 32% | 12% |
| APEX-Agents | 60% | — |
| OSWorld 2.0 | — | 4.6% |
| ExploitBench | — | 18.4% |
| GBAEval | — | 0.9% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 6,205 |
Reasoning GPT-6.1 Sol leads
GPT-6.1 Sol: 81.9 (#2), Kimi K2.6: 40.5 (#55)
| Benchmark | GPT-6.1 Sol | Kimi K2.6 |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | 95.5% | 87.2% |
| CritPt | 31.7% | 8% |
| Chess Puzzles | 61% | 26% |
| EBR-Bench | 54.3% | 2.4% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1466 | 1470 |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 80% | 18% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 166.09 | 151.05 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 94.2% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 98.5% | — |
| DTBench | — | 90.9% |
| LMCA | — | 37.3% |
Math GPT-6.1 Sol leads
GPT-6.1 Sol: 93.7 (#1), Kimi K2.6: 57.0 (#41)
| Benchmark | GPT-6.1 Sol | Kimi K2.6 |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 93.7% | 57.2% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 100% | 25.6% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 100% | 96.1% |
| ProofBench | 99% | 16% |
| LMArena Math | 1464 | 1475 |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | — | 72.9% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 39% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 14.6% |
Knowledge GPT-6.1 Sol leads
GPT-6.1 Sol: 71.8 (#4), Kimi K2.6: 54.0 (#54)
| Benchmark | GPT-6.1 Sol | Kimi K2.6 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 95.4% | 90.8% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 73.9% | 34.9% |
| LMArena Expert | 1502 | 1491 |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 10.8% |
Multimodal GPT-6.1 Sol leads
GPT-6.1 Sol: 52.7 (#5), Kimi K2.6: 31.6 (#103)
| Benchmark | GPT-6.1 Sol | Kimi K2.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1288 | 1283 |
| Furniture Assembly | 80% | 21.7% |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | — | 3.9% |
| LMArena Document | — | 1451 |
Multilingual Too close to call
GPT-6.1 Sol: 54.3 (#46), Kimi K2.6: 54.9 (#37)
| Benchmark | GPT-6.1 Sol | Kimi K2.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1438 | 1446 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1477 | 1521 |
| LMArena Russian | 1455 | 1446 |
| LMArena French | — | 1471 |
| LMArena German | — | 1450 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1443 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1427 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1464 |
Instruction Following Too close to call
GPT-6.1 Sol: 77.0 (#29), Kimi K2.6: 76.3 (#43)
| Benchmark | GPT-6.1 Sol | Kimi K2.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1468 | 1451 |
Long Context Too close to call
GPT-6.1 Sol: 44.9 (#54), Kimi K2.6: 44.9 (#52)
| Benchmark | GPT-6.1 Sol | Kimi K2.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1465 | 1468 |
Writing & Preference Kimi K2.6 leads
GPT-6.1 Sol: 63.6 (#63), Kimi K2.6: 68.5 (#26)
| Benchmark | GPT-6.1 Sol | Kimi K2.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1447 | 1455 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1432 | 1434 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1449 | 1453 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1725 |
| EQ-Bench 4 | — | 1202 |
Frequently asked questions
Is GPT-6.1 Sol better than Kimi K2.6?
GPT-6.1 Sol is the stronger model overall, scoring 65.6 to 47.7 on the Noometry Index. Kimi K2.6 costs 2.3× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-6.1 Sol's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, GPT-6.1 Sol or Kimi K2.6?
Kimi K2.6 is cheaper. It lists at $0.95 per million input tokens and $4 per million output tokens; GPT-6.1 Sol lists at $2 and $10.
Is GPT-6.1 Sol or Kimi K2.6 better for coding?
GPT-6.1 Sol scores higher on coding benchmarks: 63.2 versus 50.7 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
GPT-6.1 Sol does, with 1.05M tokens against 262K.
How many benchmarks do GPT-6.1 Sol and Kimi K2.6 share?
29 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-6.1 Sol has 34 scored results on Noometry and Kimi K2.6 has 51.