BenchLeader
Menu
Best LLMsChoose a modelLeaderboardsModelsBenchmarksProvidersReleases8

GPT-6.1 Sol vs Kimi K2.6

Full profiles: GPT-6.1 Sol (OpenAI) and Kimi K2.6 (Moonshot AI): every benchmark, price and rank.

Updated · Data from 10 sources

As of 29 Oct 2026, GPT-6.1 Sol is ahead of Kimi K2.6 on quality (67.2 vs 59.8 on the BenchLeader Index), but Kimi K2.6 is 2.3× cheaper at $1.71 vs $4.00 per 1M tokens blended. GPT-6.1 Sol leads in every category we measure both in.

Key facts (as of 29 Oct 2026)

  • GPT-6.1 Sol scores 67.2 on the BenchLeader Index and Kimi K2.6 scores 59.8 (BenchLeader, 29 Oct 2026).
  • GPT-6.1 Sol costs $4.00 per 1M tokens blended (list price, 29 Oct 2026).
  • Kimi K2.6 costs $1.71 per 1M tokens blended (list price, 29 Oct 2026).
  • Of the 18 benchmarks both models have, GPT-6.1 Sol leads 18 (BenchLeader, 29 Oct 2026).
GPT-6.1 Sol benchmarks max OpenAI Kimi K2.6 benchmarks thinking Moonshot AIOpen in the comparison tool

Which to pick for…

The pick's numbers come first. Category scores on the BenchLeader scale (50 is the average model, 15 points one standard deviation). High confidence means a lead of half a standard deviation or more; under one point is called either.

Use casePickWhyConfidence
Agents & tool useGPT-6.1 Sol64 vs 58 category score; LiveBench Agentic Coding 54.5% vs 46.9%Medium
MathsGPT-6.1 Sol73 vs 57 category score; LiveBench Mathematics 96.8% vs 84.3%High
Long documentsGPT-6.1 Sol66 vs 65 category score; AA-LCR v1.1 83.0% vs 81.0%Medium
Images and other mediaGPT-6.1 Sol66 vs 62 category score; MMMU-Pro 86.0% vs 79.4%Medium
Chat quality (human preference)–Only GPT-6.1 Sol has an Arena rating (67 category score)Not comparable
Lowest costKimi K2.6$1.71 vs $4.00 per 1M blended; agentic coding session $0.073 vs $0.160–
Fastest first answerKimi K2.698.4 s (Kimi K2.6 (thinking)) vs 249.5 s (GPT-6.1 Sol (max)) to the first answer token–
High volume on a budgetNeither flagshipA smaller model is usually the better fit: Cheapest good LLMs, Fastest LLMs–

Key differences

  • GPT-6.1 Sol (max) leads on quality: 67.2 vs 59.8.
  • GPT-6.1 Sol (max) is stronger in agents & tools, coding, human preference, knowledge, long context, maths, multimodal, reasoning.
  • Kimi K2.6 (thinking) is stronger in instruction following.
  • Kimi K2.6 (thinking) is 2.3× cheaper ($1.71 vs $4.00 per 1M blended).
  • GPT-6.1 Sol (max) streams 1.7× faster (79 vs 47 tokens per second).

At a glance

SpecGPT-6.1 SolKimi K2.6
DeveloperOpenAIMoonshot AI
Released29 Sept 202620 Apr 2026
Context window (tokens)1,050,000262,144
Compared atGPT-6.1 Sol (max)Kimi K2.6 (thinking)
Open weightsNoYes
Price in / out / cached input per 1M$2.00 / $10.00 / $0.100$0.950 / $4.00 / $0.160

Category by category

Category scores on the BenchLeader scale: 50 is the average evaluated model, 15 points is one standard deviation. A gap under one point is called level.

CategoryGPT-6.1 Sol (max)Kimi K2.6 (thinking)Leader
Reasoning73.2–not comparable
Coding71.6–not comparable
Agents & tools64.458.4GPT-6.1 Sol
Maths72.857.3GPT-6.1 Sol
Knowledge73.0–not comparable
Instruction following–74.0not comparable
Human preference67.1–not comparable
Multimodal65.962.1GPT-6.1 Sol
Long context66.465.4GPT-6.1 Sol

Where sources disagree

Across the 18 benchmarks both have, GPT-6.1 Sol leads 18, Kimi K2.6 leads 0. Every overall index that rates both puts GPT-6.1 Sol ahead.

Overall indexGPT-6.1 Sol (max)Kimi K2.6 (thinking)Leader
BenchLeader Index67.259.8GPT-6.1 Sol
Arena Text14801461†GPT-6.1 Sol

Each publisher runs its own tasks, harnesses and effort settings, so their overall verdicts can differ; BenchLeader reconciles them on one scale. † measured at another effort setting of the same model (the publisher did not test the one compared here).

Price, speed and latency

List prices blended at three input tokens per output token. Per-task prices use the token counts on the methodology page; suite cost is what Artificial Analysis paid to run its whole Intelligence Index.

MeasureGPT-6.1 Sol (max)Kimi K2.6 (thinking)
Blended price per 1M tokens$4.00$1.71
Input / output per 1M$2.00 / $10.00$0.950 / $4.00
Cached input per 1M$0.100$0.160
Price per task: chat reply$0.0038$0.0016
Price per task: summarize a 30-page report$0.030$0.014
Price per task: code edit$0.027$0.012
Price per task: agentic coding session$0.160$0.073
Price per task: structured extraction$0.0060$0.0027
Cost to run a full benchmark suite$1.27–
Output speed79 tok/s47 tok/s
Time to first answer249.5 s98.4 s
Time to a complete answer255.8 s109.2 s

Each model is compared at its best-ranked reasoning-effort setting. GPT-6.1 Sol (max) scores 67.2 and takes 249 s to its first answer token; GPT-6.1 Sol (xhigh) scores 64.3 in 97 s, GPT-6.1 Sol (high) scores 64.0 in 28 s. Kimi K2.6 (thinking) scores 59.8 and takes 98 s to its first answer token; Kimi K2.6 scores 55.3 in 1 s. Higher effort means more thinking before the answer: better scores, longer waits and more tokens billed. How reasoning effort changes scores and cost.

Every benchmark

149 benchmarks, grouped by category; each name links to the board and its leaders. † measured at another effort setting of the same model, shown for reference and not counted as a win.

MetricPublisherGPT-6.1 Sol (max)Kimi K2.6 (thinking)
BenchLeader IndexBenchLeader67.259.8
Agents & tools scoreBenchLeader64.458.4
Coding scoreBenchLeader71.6–
Human preference scoreBenchLeader67.1–
Knowledge scoreBenchLeader73.0–
Long context scoreBenchLeader66.465.4
Maths scoreBenchLeader72.857.3
Multimodal scoreBenchLeader65.962.1
Reasoning scoreBenchLeader73.2–
Instruction following scoreBenchLeader–74.0
Blended price $/MBenchLeader$4.00$1.71
Output speedBenchLeader79 tok/s47 tok/s
Time to first answerBenchLeader249.5 s98.4 s
Context windowBenchLeader1,050,000 tokens262,144 tokens
Reasoning
GPQA DiamondEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub95.4%90.8%†
Arena Hard PromptsArena (LMArena)15041485†
LiveBench 2.0 ReasoningLiveBench92.6%†–
LiveBench 1.0 ReasoningLiveBench92.6%79.4%
GPQA Diamond (AA)Artificial Analysis–91.1%
Humanity's Last Exam (AA)Artificial Analysis52.9%37.5%
HLE-Diamond (AA)Artificial Analysis58.8%–
GPQA Diamond (Vals)Vals AI–89.1%†
ARC-AGI-1ARC Prize96.5%–
ARC-AGI-2ARC Prize94.2%–
ARC-AGI-3ARC Prize96.2%–
CritPtArtificial Analysis31.7%8.0%
CritPt v2 hard subset (AA)Artificial Analysis68.5%–
MysteryMechanismVals AI46.4%–
Chess PuzzlesEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub68.0%20.0%†
Mystery Game PuzzlesEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub80.0%18.0%†
LMCAEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub62.8%37.3%†
DTBenchEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub96.5%90.9%†
Coding
SWE-bench Verified (Epoch)Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub–76.7%†
SciCodeSciCode54.2%53.5%†
WeirdMLWeirdML–55.9%†
FrontierCodeCognition50.2%†–
Arena CodingArena (LMArena)15371516†
Arena WebDevArena (LMArena)17521509†
LiveBench 2.0 CodingLiveBench96.0%†–
Show all 149 benchmarks
MetricPublisherGPT-6.1 Sol (max)Kimi K2.6 (thinking)
Coding
LiveBench 1.0 CodingLiveBench80.4%78.6%
SciCode (AA)Artificial Analysis54.2%51.5%
LiveCodeBenchVals AI–86.8%†
IOIVals AI96.9%–
SWE-bench (Vals)Vals AI–76.2%†
Code MigrationVals AI65.1%27.8%†
Code Migration v1.1Vals AI77.3%–
ProgramBenchVals AI3.0%0.0%†
SWE-bench MultimodalVals AI43.5%–
Vibe Code Bench v1.1Vals AI88.9%37.9%†
ALE-BenchEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub2743.81092.7†
Terminal-Bench 4.0 (AA)Artificial Analysis56.1%0.5%
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (AA)Artificial Analysis–65.9%
Startrise FrontendStartrise78.6%†–
FrontierCode 1.1 (AA)Artificial Analysis49.1%–
FrontierCode 2.0 (AA)Artificial Analysis40.6%–
Agents & tools
Terminal-BenchTerminal-Bench58.2%–
OSWorld-Verified 2.0OSWorld–4.6%†
APEX-AgentsMercor60.0%–
Arena AgentArena (LMArena)13.6–
LiveBench Long AgenticLiveBench68.7%†–
LiveBench BrowserLiveBench93.3%†–
LiveBench Agentic CodingLiveBench54.5%46.9%
Terminal-Bench HardArtificial Analysis–43.9%
τ²-Bench Telecom (AA)Artificial Analysis–95.9%
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals)Vals AI–53.6%†
HiL-BenchScale AI SEAL62.3%†18.7%†
GDPval-AA v2.1, normalised scoreArtificial Analysis54.8%–
GDPval-AA v2.1Artificial Analysis1608–
τ³-Banking (AA)Artificial Analysis–23.3%
ITBench SRE (AA)Artificial Analysis–31.2%
Analyst Agent (AA)Artificial Analysis50.0%–
APEX-Agents (AA)Artificial Analysis–28.5%
CyberBenchVals AI39.3%–
Finance Agent v2Vals AI52.0%44.9%†
Finance Agent v2.1Vals AI61.8%–
Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark v1.1Vals AI6.3%–
Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark v1Vals AI5.4%1.7%†
Legal Research BenchVals AI38.5%15.9%†
Robo-benchVals AI28.3%–
SREBenchVals AI50.8%–
Tax Agent BenchVals AI21.8%12.4%†
Terminal-Bench 2.0 (Vals)Vals AI–57.3%†
Terminal-Bench 4.0 (Vals)Vals AI55.0%–
Terminal-Bench ScienceVals AI52.9%–
Arena SearchArena (LMArena)1250–
ExploitBenchEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub–18.4%†
GBAEvalEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub–0.9%†
Vending-Bench 2Andon Labs–6204.6†
AutomationBenchArtificial Analysis64.9%13.0%
GDP.pdf (AA)Artificial Analysis31.0%13.0%
Harvey LAB-AA v1.1Harvey6.9%–
EnterpriseOps-GymArtificial Analysis–38.5%
AA-Briefcase v1.1Artificial Analysis1555–
Terminal-Bench-Science 0.1 (AA)Artificial Analysis58.1%–
FACTS SearchGoogle88.2%†–
Maths
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub93.7%57.2%†
FrontierMath Tier 4Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub100.0%25.6%†
OTIS Mock AIMEEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub100.0%96.1%†
ProofBenchVals AI99.0%†16.0%†
LiveBench MathematicsLiveBench96.8%84.3%
AIME 2026MathArena–95.8%
HMMT February 2026MathArena–94.7%
USAMO 2026MathArena–51.2%
MathArena ApexMathArena–24.0%
Arena MathsArena (LMArena)15131479†
Knowledge
SimpleQA VerifiedEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub73.9%34.9%†
LiveBench 2.0 Data AnalysisLiveBench82.7%†–
LiveBench ResearchLiveBench83.5%†–
LiveBench 1.0 Data AnalysisLiveBench82.7%65.1%
AA-Omniscience v1.1Artificial Analysis42.0–
MMLU-ProVals AI–87.6%†
LegalBenchVals AI–84.7%†
CorpFinVals AI–66.7%†
TaxEvalVals AI–74.7%†
PRBench FinanceScale AI SEAL46.2%†–
PRBench LegalScale AI SEAL47.9%†–
BioMysteryBenchVals AI79.6%–
CaseLaw v2Vals AI–61.2%†
ClaimBenchVals AI100.0%–
Excel Modeling BenchmarkVals AI70.8%57.9%†
Excel Modeling Benchmark v1.1Vals AI71.1%–
MedCodeVals AI48.8%40.1%†
MedScribeVals AI86.5%78.2%†
Public Benefits Bench v1.1Vals AI59.3%56.6%†
EBR-benchEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub54.3%2.4%†
GDP.pdfEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub35.0%12.0%†
AA-Omniscience v1.1: accuracyArtificial Analysis61.8%–
AA-Omniscience v1.1: non-hallucinationArtificial Analysis48.1%–
HealthBench Professional (AA)OpenAI65.1%–
Instruction following
LiveBench LanguageLiveBench90.1%75.1%
LiveBench Instruction FollowingLiveBench74.2%64.4%
IFBenchArtificial Analysis–76.0%
MultiChallengeScale AI SEAL82.0%†–
Arena Instruction FollowingArena (LMArena)14851455†
Human preference
Arena TextArena (LMArena)14801461†
EQ-Bench 4EQ-Bench1272†1191†
Arena Creative WritingArena (LMArena)14531432†
Arena Multi-turnArena (LMArena)14831461†
Arena Longer QueriesArena (LMArena)14891477†
Multimodal
Arena VisionArena (LMArena)12881282†
LiveBench DesignLiveBench82.1%†–
MMMU-ProArtificial Analysis86.0%79.4%
MMMU-Pro (Vals)Vals AI–86.3%†
MortgageTaxVals AI–65.8%†
SAGEVals AI90.5%–
Blueprint-Bench 2Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub–3.9%†
Code2Video-AAArtificial Analysis1369–
AA-3DArtificial Analysis1119–
Long context
AA-LCR v1.1Artificial Analysis83.0%81.0%
Arena DocumentArena (LMArena)–1450†
MLCRArtificial Analysis38.3%11.1%
Composite
Epoch Capabilities IndexEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub168.4†150.9†
LiveBench 2.0LiveBench84.1%†–
LiveBench 1.0LiveBench81.6%70.5%
AA Intelligence Index v5.0Artificial Analysis54.5–
AA Intelligence Index v4.3.2Artificial Analysis51.827.0
AA Progress Index v1Artificial Analysis348.5284.4
Vals IndexVals AI63.9–
Vals Finance IndexVals AI55.8%–
Vals RSI IndexVals AI26.6%–
Vals Science IndexVals AI59.6%–
Vals Multimodal IndexVals AI–56.4%†
Vals Router IndexVals AI63.9%†–

Data as of 2026-10-29. Best configuration of each model; every score links to its source on the model pages.

What changed

  • Kimi K2.6 (thinking): BenchLeader Index 60.3 → 59.8.
  • GPT-6.1 Sol (max): 5 new results (AA Intelligence Index v5.0, AA Progress Index v1, HLE-Diamond (AA)…); 3 score revisions; cost per task moved from $0.72/M to $1.27/M (76% up).
  • Kimi K2.6 (thinking): 1 new result (AA Progress Index v1).
  • Kimi K2.6 (thinking): cost per task moved from $0.80/M to $0.71/M (12% down).
  • GPT-6.1 Sol (max): 10 new results (ClaimBench, Code Migration v1.1, Excel Modeling Benchmark v1.1…).
  • GPT-6.1 Sol (max): BenchLeader Index 67.9 → 67.4.
  • GPT-6.1 Sol (max): 5 score revisions.
  • Kimi K2.6 (thinking): 1 new result (MLCR).
  • GPT-6.1 Sol (max): 2 score revisions.
  • GPT-6.1 Sol (max): 2 new results (LMCA, DTBench).

Rankings: Best LLM overall · Best LLM for coding · Best LLM for agents · Best cheap LLMs

GPT-6.1 Sol vs Kimi K2.6: questions

Is GPT-6.1 Sol better than Kimi K2.6?
GPT-6.1 Sol (max) leads on quality: 67.2 vs 59.8. The BenchLeader Index combines every independent quality benchmark; GPT-6.1 Sol (max) is ahead overall as of 29 Oct 2026, but check the category scores for your use.
GPT-6.1 Sol vs Kimi K2.6: which is cheaper, and will that change?
Kimi K2.6 is cheaper today: $1.71 against $4.00 per million tokens, blended at three input tokens per output token. No price change has been announced for either.
Which is faster, GPT-6.1 Sol or Kimi K2.6?
GPT-6.1 Sol streams faster (79 vs 47 output tokens per second, Artificial Analysis 7-day median).
Is GPT-6.1 Sol or Kimi K2.6 better for agents and tool use?
GPT-6.1 Sol scores higher in agentic tasks (64 vs 58 on the category index, where 50 is average).
Which is better for long documents?
GPT-6.1 Sol scores higher on long-context benchmarks (66 vs 65). GPT-6.1 Sol accepts more context: 1,050,000 against 262,144 tokens for Kimi K2.6.
More questions (3)
Which has lower latency?
Kimi K2.6 answers first: 98.4 s against 249.5 s to the first answer token, as Artificial Analysis measures it. Reasoning effort drives most of this: a higher setting thinks longer before it answers.
Do independent benchmarks agree on GPT-6.1 Sol vs Kimi K2.6?
Across the 18 benchmarks both have, GPT-6.1 Sol leads 18, Kimi K2.6 leads 0. Every overall index that rates both puts GPT-6.1 Sol ahead.
When was GPT-6.1 Sol released?
GPT-6.1 Sol was released on 29 Sept 2026.