Model comparison
Kimi K2.6 vs Qwen3.6 Plus
Head-to-head evidence from 40 shared benchmark results across 7 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Kimi K2.6 #74 (Estimated); Qwen3.6 Plus #30 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Kimi K2.6 and Qwen3.6 Plus share 40 comparable benchmark results. 5 of 8 categories are comparable. 11 results are unique to Kimi K2.6; 20 to Qwen3.6 Plus.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 40
- Kimi K2.6 only
- 11
- Qwen3.6 Plus only
- 20
- Comparable categories
- 5 / 8
Pick Qwen3.6 Plus if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Kimi K2.6 only becomes the better choice if agentic is the priority.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 40 shared benchmark results across 7 evidence categories; 5 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
Qwen3.6 Plus is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 65.2 to 56.79. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Qwen3.6 Plus's sharpest advantage is in knowledge, where it averages 57.1 against 42.2. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3), 38.966% to 26.207%. Kimi K2.6 does hit back in agentic, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
Qwen3.6 Plus gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 256K for Kimi K2.6.
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 | Kimi K2.6 | Δ | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|---|
| Knowledge | Kimi K2.642.2 | Margin→ 14.9 | Qwen3.6 Plus57.1 |
| Agentic | Kimi K2.673.5 | Margin← 11.9 | Qwen3.6 Plus61.6 |
| Math | Kimi K2.667.1 | Margin← 6.6 | Qwen3.6 Plus60.5 |
| Coding | Kimi K2.664.4 | Margin→ 5.9 | Qwen3.6 Plus70.3 |
| Multimodal | Kimi K2.679.8 | MarginTie | Qwen3.6 Plus79.8 |
| Reasoning | Kimi K2.6Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.6 Plus62.0 |
| Multilingual | Kimi K2.6Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.6 Plus84.7 |
| Inst. Following | Kimi K2.6Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.6 Plus82.3 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)
MathA 38.966%B 26.207%Winner: Kimi K2.6Δ 12.8FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3): Kimi K2.6 scored 38.966%; Qwen3.6 Plus scored 26.207%. Kimi K2.6 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)
MathA 14.580%B 8.333%Winner: Kimi K2.6Δ 6.2FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4): Kimi K2.6 scored 14.580%; Qwen3.6 Plus scored 8.333%. Kimi K2.6 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
HLE
KnowledgeA 34.7%B 28.8%Winner: Kimi K2.6Δ 5.9HLE: Kimi K2.6 scored 34.7%; Qwen3.6 Plus scored 28.8%. Kimi K2.6 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
Terminal-Bench 2.0
AgenticA 66.7%B 61.6%Winner: Kimi K2.6Δ 5.1Terminal-Bench 2.0: Kimi K2.6 scored 66.7%; Qwen3.6 Plus scored 61.6%. Kimi K2.6 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
HMMT Feb 2026
MathA 92.7%B 87.8%Winner: Kimi K2.6Δ 4.9HMMT Feb 2026: Kimi K2.6 scored 92.7%; Qwen3.6 Plus scored 87.8%. Kimi K2.6 wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Kimi K2.6 | Qwen3.6 Plus | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Kimi K2.6$0.95 input / $4 output | Qwen3.6 PlusNot available | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Kimi K2.6Not available | Qwen3.6 PlusNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Kimi K2.6Not available | Qwen3.6 PlusNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Kimi K2.6256K | Qwen3.6 Plus1M | Qwen3.6 Plus lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticKimi K2.6 wins22 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.6 | Qwen3.6 Plus | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 66.7% | 61.6% | Kimi K2.6 leads |
| BrowseCompSource | 83.2% | — | Not comparable |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | 73.1% | — | Not comparable |
| ToolathlonSource | 50% | 39.8% | Kimi K2.6 leads |
| MCP AtlasSource | 55.9% | 48.2% | Kimi K2.6 leads |
| Claw-EvalSource | 62.3% | 58.8% | Kimi K2.6 leads |
| DeepSearchQASource | 92.5% | — | Not comparable |
| WideResearchSource | 80.8% | 74.3% | Kimi K2.6 leads |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 30.3% | 27.6% | Kimi K2.6 leads |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 95.9% | 97.7% | Qwen3.6 Plus leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 34.5% | 31.8% | Kimi K2.6 leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 1189 | 1135 | Kimi K2.6 leads |
| APEX-Agents-AASource | 28.5% | — | Not comparable |
| Gert LabsSource | 56.82% | 50.60% | Kimi K2.6 leads |
| ResearchClawBenchSource | 18.0% | 18.0% | Tie |
| OSWorld 2.0Source | 4.6% | — | Not comparable |
| terminalBenchHardSource | 43.9% | — | Not comparable |
| QwenClawBenchSource | — | 57.2% | Not comparable |
| τ³-bench resultsSource | — | 70.7% | Not comparable |
| VITA-BenchSource | — | 44.3% | Not comparable |
| DeepPlanningSource | — | 41.5% | Not comparable |
| MCP-TasksSource | — | 74.1% | Not comparable |
CodingQwen3.6 Plus wins10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.6 | Qwen3.6 Plus | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 80.2% | 78.8% | Kimi K2.6 leads |
| LiveCodeBench v6Source | 89.6% | 87.1% | Kimi K2.6 leads |
| SWE-bench ProSource | 58.6% | 56.6% | Kimi K2.6 leads |
| SWE MultilingualSource | 76.7% | 73.8% | Kimi K2.6 leads |
| SciCodeSource | 52.2% | — | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 66.7% | — | Not comparable |
| Vibe Code BenchSource | 37.89% | 25.56% | Kimi K2.6 leads |
| cursorBench31Source | 47.6% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | 61.8% | 54.5% | Kimi K2.6 leads |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 53.5% | 40.7% | Kimi K2.6 leads |
Reasoning4 benchmarks
KnowledgeQwen3.6 Plus wins13 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.6 | Qwen3.6 Plus | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 90.5% | 90.4% | Kimi K2.6 leads |
| GPQA-DSource | 90.5% | — | Not comparable |
| HLESource | 34.7% | 28.8% | Kimi K2.6 leads |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 44.2% | 39.6% | Kimi K2.6 leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 91.1% | 88.2% | Kimi K2.6 leads |
| AA-HLESource | 35.9% | 25.7% | Kimi K2.6 leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | 6.4% | 2.7% | Kimi K2.6 leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 32.8% | 26.2% | Kimi K2.6 leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 39.3% | 32.0% | Qwen3.6 Plus leads |
| SuperGPQASource | — | 71.6% | Not comparable |
| MMLU-ProSource | — | 88.5% | Not comparable |
| MMLU-ReduxSource | — | 94.5% | Not comparable |
| C-EvalSource | — | 93.3% | Not comparable |
MathKimi K2.6 wins7 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.6 | Qwen3.6 Plus | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AIME26Source | 96.4% | 95.3% | Kimi K2.6 leads |
| HMMT Feb 2026Source | 92.7% | 87.8% | Kimi K2.6 leads |
| MMAnswerBenchSource | 86.0% | 83.8% | Kimi K2.6 leads |
| FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source | 38.966% | 26.207% | Kimi K2.6 leads |
| FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source | 14.580% | 8.333% | Kimi K2.6 leads |
| HMMT Feb 2025Source | — | 96.7% | Not comparable |
| HMMT Nov 2025Source | — | 94.6% | Not comparable |
Multilingual2 benchmarks
MultimodalTie10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.6 | Qwen3.6 Plus | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMMU-ProSource | 79.4% | 78.8% | Kimi K2.6 leads |
| MMMU-Pro w/ PythonSource | 80.1% | — | Not comparable |
| CharXivSource | 80.4% | 81.5% | Qwen3.6 Plus leads |
| MathVisionSource | 87.4% | 88.0% | Qwen3.6 Plus leads |
| V*Source | 96.9% | 96.9% | Tie |
| AA-MMMU-ProSource | 79.4% | 78.0% | Kimi K2.6 leads |
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | 1306 | 1249 | Kimi K2.6 leads |
| MMMUSource | — | 86.0% | Not comparable |
| VideoMMMUSource | — | 84.0% | Not comparable |
| ScreenSpot ProSource | — | 68.2% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (6)
Which is better, Kimi K2.6 or Qwen3.6 Plus?
Qwen3.6 Plus is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 65.2 to 56.79. The biggest single separator in this matchup is FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3), where the scores are 38.966% and 26.207%.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, Kimi K2.6 or Qwen3.6 Plus?
Qwen3.6 Plus has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 57.1 versus 42.2. Inside this category, AA-HLE is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for coding, Kimi K2.6 or Qwen3.6 Plus?
Qwen3.6 Plus has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 70.3 versus 64.4. Inside this category, AA-SciCode is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for math, Kimi K2.6 or Qwen3.6 Plus?
Kimi K2.6 has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 67.1 versus 60.5. Inside this category, FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3) is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for agentic tasks, Kimi K2.6 or Qwen3.6 Plus?
Kimi K2.6 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 73.5 versus 61.6. Inside this category, GDPval-AA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for multimodal and grounded tasks, Kimi K2.6 or Qwen3.6 Plus?
Kimi K2.6 and Qwen3.6 Plus are effectively tied for multimodal and grounded tasks here, both landing at 79.8 on average.
Self-host vs API cost
Estimates at 50,000 req/day · 1000 tokens/req average.
Related Comparisons
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.