gpt-5.6-terra
Chat comparison
gpt-5.6-terravskimi-k2.7-code
Compare the things that matter before you build: current price, capabilities, and latest aggregated LLM7 statistics.
Current pricing
See the cost difference clearly
kimi-k2.7-code
What's different
Only capabilities that differ between these models are listed. Green highlights the broader supported option or larger context window.
Context window
gpt-5.6-terraBetter fit
1,000,000 tokens
kimi-k2.7-code
256,000 tokens
Input formats
gpt-5.6-terra
text, image
kimi-k2.7-code
text
Vision
gpt-5.6-terraBetter fit
Supported
kimi-k2.7-code
Not supported
Capability scores
AI-estimated ratings on 30 criteria from head-to-head comparisons against 86 other text models in the LLM7 catalog, judged by TypeSafe Jev from public information (2026-10-20). Each score is the win rate against the field, relative to the strongest model for that criterion (100%). Not a benchmark.
gpt-5.6-terra · leads in 27
83%
Strong
kimi-k2.7-code · leads in 1
53%
Moderate
Knowledge & reasoning
General knowledge
gpt-5.6-terraLeads92%kimi-k2.7-code37%Logical reasoning
gpt-5.6-terraLeads87%kimi-k2.7-code59%Mathematics
gpt-5.6-terraLeads90%kimi-k2.7-code68%Scientific and technical depth
gpt-5.6-terraLeads87%kimi-k2.7-code56%Planning and task decomposition
gpt-5.6-terraLeads85%kimi-k2.7-code62%
Coding & tools
Code generation
gpt-5.6-terra81%kimi-k2.7-codeLeads87%Debugging and code review
gpt-5.6-terra88%kimi-k2.7-code88%Agentic coding
gpt-5.6-terraLeads90%kimi-k2.7-code81%Tool and function calling
gpt-5.6-terraLeads87%kimi-k2.7-code58%SQL and query writing
gpt-5.6-terraLeads90%kimi-k2.7-code84%
Writing & language
Creative writing
gpt-5.6-terraLeads80%kimi-k2.7-code36%Professional writing
gpt-5.6-terraLeads84%kimi-k2.7-code39%Conversational quality
gpt-5.6-terraLeads85%kimi-k2.7-code41%Multilingual ability
gpt-5.6-terraLeads81%kimi-k2.7-code55%Translation
gpt-5.6-terraLeads88%kimi-k2.7-code48%Summarization
gpt-5.6-terraLeads85%kimi-k2.7-code48%
Data & professional work
Data analysis
gpt-5.6-terraLeads90%kimi-k2.7-code59%Professional domains
gpt-5.6-terraLeads85%kimi-k2.7-code43%Information extraction
gpt-5.6-terraLeads91%kimi-k2.7-code52%Classification and labeling
gpt-5.6-terraLeads96%kimi-k2.7-code44%Long-context handling
gpt-5.6-terraLeads85%kimi-k2.7-code52%
Reliability & control
Instruction following
gpt-5.6-terraLeads83%kimi-k2.7-code50%Structured output
gpt-5.6-terraLeads89%kimi-k2.7-code59%Factual accuracy
gpt-5.6-terraLeads82%kimi-k2.7-code44%Safety and alignment
gpt-5.6-terraLeads74%kimi-k2.7-code39%Steerability
gpt-5.6-terraLeads80%kimi-k2.7-code45%Output consistency
gpt-5.6-terraLeads90%kimi-k2.7-code53%
Speed, cost & vision
Response speed
gpt-5.6-terraLeads44%kimi-k2.7-code30%Cost efficiency
gpt-5.6-terraLeads66%kimi-k2.7-code34%Image understanding
gpt-5.6-terra59%kimi-k2.7-codeNo image input
Latest LLM7 statistics
Recent aggregated percentages and response-time metrics from LLM7, not a global model benchmark or traffic disclosure.
Recent stability
gpt-5.6-terra
93.73%
kimi-k2.7-code
99.83%
Average response time
gpt-5.6-terra
29,135.19 ms
kimi-k2.7-code
6,571.81 ms
P95 API latency
gpt-5.6-terra
60,000 ms
kimi-k2.7-code
30,000 ms
Side-by-side trends
Shared charts make the observed differences easier to read. Metrics without enough history stay hidden.
Request success rate
Both models on the same scale
Average API latency
Both models on the same scale
P95 API latency
Both models on the same scale
Estimate your workload
Published rates are loaded from the pricing API; per-request quotes are billed from actual provider usage.
Quick take
- gpt-5.6-terra has a larger context window.
- gpt-5.6-terra supports image input while the other model does not.
- kimi-k2.7-code recorded higher recent LLM7 stability during this period.
- kimi-k2.7-code recorded a lower observed p95 API latency on LLM7 during this period.