Model comparison
GPT-5.6 Sol vs Kimi K3
Head-to-head evidence from 27 shared benchmark results across 5 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: GPT-5.6 Sol #3 (Supported); Kimi K3 #4 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. GPT-5.6 Sol and Kimi K3 share 27 comparable benchmark results. 3 of 8 categories are comparable. 19 results are unique to GPT-5.6 Sol; 30 to Kimi K3.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 27
- GPT-5.6 Sol only
- 19
- Kimi K3 only
- 30
- Comparable categories
- 3 / 8
Pick GPT-5.6 Sol if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Kimi K3 only becomes the better choice if you want the cheaper token bill or you need the larger 1.05M context window.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 27 shared benchmark results across 5 evidence categories; 3 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
GPT-5.6 Sol finishes one point ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 81.96 to 80.96. That is enough to call, but not enough to treat as a blowout. This matchup comes down to a few meaningful edges rather than one model dominating the board.
GPT-5.6 Sol's sharpest advantage is in knowledge, where it averages 94.6 against 61. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is Terminal-Bench 2.0, 91.9% to 88.3%.
GPT-5.6 Sol is also the more expensive model on tokens at $5.00 input / $30.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $3.00 input / $15.00 output per 1M tokens for Kimi K3. That is roughly 2.0x on output cost alone. Kimi K3 gives you the larger context window at 1.05M, compared with 1M for GPT-5.6 Sol.
Category breakdown
Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.
| Category | GPT-5.6 Sol | Δ | Kimi K3 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Knowledge | GPT-5.6 Sol94.6 | Margin← 33.6 | Kimi K361.0 |
| Multimodal | GPT-5.6 Sol83.0 | Margin← 4.5 | Kimi K378.5 |
| Agentic | GPT-5.6 Sol92.0 | Margin← 2.5 | Kimi K389.5 |
| Coding | GPT-5.6 Sol64.6 | MarginNo overlap | Kimi K3Not measured |
| Math | GPT-5.6 Sol87.5 | MarginNo overlap | Kimi K3Not measured |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
Terminal-Bench 2.0
AgenticA 91.9%B 88.3%Winner: GPT-5.6 SolΔ 3.6Terminal-Bench 2.0: GPT-5.6 Sol scored 91.9%; Kimi K3 scored 88.3%. GPT-5.6 Sol wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
MMMU-Pro
MultimodalA 83%B 81.6%Winner: GPT-5.6 SolΔ 1.4MMMU-Pro: GPT-5.6 Sol scored 83%; Kimi K3 scored 81.6%. GPT-5.6 Sol wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
GPQA
KnowledgeA 94.6%B 93.5%Winner: GPT-5.6 SolΔ 1.1GPQA: GPT-5.6 Sol scored 94.6%; Kimi K3 scored 93.5%. GPT-5.6 Sol wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
BrowseComp
AgenticA 92.2%B 91.2%Winner: GPT-5.6 SolΔ 1BrowseComp: GPT-5.6 Sol scored 92.2%; Kimi K3 scored 91.2%. GPT-5.6 Sol wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | GPT-5.6 Sol | Kimi K3 | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | GPT-5.6 Sol$5 input / $30 output | Kimi K3$3 input / $15 output | Kimi K3 has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | GPT-5.6 SolNot available | Kimi K3Not available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | GPT-5.6 SolNot available | Kimi K3Not available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | GPT-5.6 Sol1M | Kimi K31.05M | Kimi K3 lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticGPT-5.6 Sol wins27 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Sol | Kimi K3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 91.9% | 88.3% | GPT-5.6 Sol leads |
| BrowseCompSource | 92.2% | 91.2% | GPT-5.6 Sol leads |
| OSWorld 2.0Source | 62.6% | — | Not comparable |
| CyberGymSource | 84.5% | — | Not comparable |
| ExploitGymSource | 33.7% | — | Not comparable |
| ToolathlonSource | 58% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 54.0% | 50.1% | GPT-5.6 Sol leads |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 85.1% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 61.8% | 59.0% | GPT-5.6 Sol leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 1736 | 1679 | GPT-5.6 Sol leads |
| AA BriefcaseSource | 1501 | 1543 | Kimi K3 leads |
| AA ITBenchSource | 56.2% | 47.7% | GPT-5.6 Sol leads |
| AA Tau3 BankingSource | 33.0% | 33.4% | Kimi K3 leads |
| AA AutomationBenchSource | 51.2% | 52.7% | Kimi K3 leads |
| AA Harvey LABSource | 87.2% | 94.6% | Kimi K3 leads |
| terminalBenchHardSource | 65.9% | — | Not comparable |
| aaTerminalBench21Source | 88% | 85% | GPT-5.6 Sol leads |
| DeepSearchQASource | — | 95.0% | Not comparable |
| Toolathlon-VerifiedSource | — | 73.2% | Not comparable |
| MCP AtlasSource | — | 84.2% | Not comparable |
| AutomationBenchSource | — | 30.8% | Not comparable |
| JobBenchSource | — | 52.9% | Not comparable |
| APEX-AgentsSource | — | 37.6% | Not comparable |
| SpreadsheetBench 2Source | — | 34.8% | Not comparable |
| DECK-BenchSource | — | 73.5% | Not comparable |
| AA EnterpriseOps-GymSource | — | 45.3% | Not comparable |
| APEX-Agents-AASource | — | 41.3% | Not comparable |
Coding14 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Sol | Kimi K3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench ProSource | 64.6% | — | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 91.9% | — | Not comparable |
| deepSweSource | 72.7% | 67.5% | GPT-5.6 Sol leads |
| FrontierCode 1.1 ExtendedSource | 60.6% | — | Not comparable |
| cursorBench32Source | 67.2% | — | Not comparable |
| VulcanBench v3Source | 87.0% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | 77.4% | 76.2% | GPT-5.6 Sol leads |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 56.1% | 58.7% | Kimi K3 leads |
| FrontierSWESource | — | 81.2% | Not comparable |
| ProgramBenchSource | — | 77.8% | Not comparable |
| Kimi Code Bench v2Source | — | 72.9% | Not comparable |
| sweMarathonSource | — | 42% | Not comparable |
| PostTrain BenchSource | — | 36.6% | Not comparable |
| MLS-Bench LiteSource | — | 48.3% | Not comparable |
Reasoning4 benchmarks
KnowledgeGPT-5.6 Sol wins12 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Sol | Kimi K3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 94.6% | 93.5% | GPT-5.6 Sol leads |
| GPQA-DSource | 94.6% | 93.5% | GPT-5.6 Sol leads |
| HealthBench ProfessionalSource | 60.5% | — | Not comparable |
| HealthBench HardSource | 33.1% | — | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 58.9% | 57.1% | GPT-5.6 Sol leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 94.1% | 93.5% | GPT-5.6 Sol leads |
| AA-HLESource | 47.2% | 44.3% | GPT-5.6 Sol leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | 21.7% | 18.4% | GPT-5.6 Sol leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 58.5% | 46.0% | GPT-5.6 Sol leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 88.8% | 50.9% | Kimi K3 leads |
| HLESource | — | 56% | Not comparable |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | — | 43.5% | Not comparable |
Math3 benchmarks
MultimodalGPT-5.6 Sol wins15 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Sol | Kimi K3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMMU-ProSource | 83% | 81.6% | GPT-5.6 Sol leads |
| MMMU-Pro w/ PythonSource | 84.6% | 83.4% | GPT-5.6 Sol leads |
| AA-MMMU-ProSource | 83.4% | 80.5% | GPT-5.6 Sol leads |
| OfficeQA ProSource | — | 63.3% | Not comparable |
| CharXiv w/o toolsSource | — | 84.8% | Not comparable |
| CharXivSource | — | 91.3% | Not comparable |
| MathVisionSource | — | 94.3% | Not comparable |
| MathVision w/ PythonSource | — | 97.8% | Not comparable |
| BabyVision w/ PythonSource | — | 85.7% | Not comparable |
| ZeroBenchSource | — | 23.0% | Not comparable |
| ZeroBench w/ PythonSource | — | 41.0% | Not comparable |
| WorldVQA ForceAnswerSource | — | 51.0% | Not comparable |
| OmniDocBenchSource | — | 91.1% | Not comparable |
| PerceptionBenchSource | — | 58.5% | Not comparable |
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | — | 1386 | Not comparable |
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Sol | Kimi K3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 72.7% | — | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (4)
Which is better, GPT-5.6 Sol or Kimi K3?
GPT-5.6 Sol is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 81.96 to 80.96. The biggest single separator in this matchup is Terminal-Bench 2.0, where the scores are 91.9% and 88.3%.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, GPT-5.6 Sol or Kimi K3?
GPT-5.6 Sol has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 94.6 versus 61. Inside this category, AA-Omniscience Hallucination Rate is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for agentic tasks, GPT-5.6 Sol or Kimi K3?
GPT-5.6 Sol has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 92 versus 89.5. Inside this category, GDPval-AA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for multimodal and grounded tasks, GPT-5.6 Sol or Kimi K3?
GPT-5.6 Sol has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 83 versus 78.5. Inside this category, AA-MMMU-Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
Choose a model with this week’s evidence
Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.
One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.