LLM7.io
LLM7.io
Toggle theme

Chat comparison

Moonshot AI logo

kimi-k2.6vsllama-4-maverick

Compare the things that matter before you build: current price, capabilities, and latest aggregated LLM7 statistics.

Current pricing

See the cost difference clearly

llama-4-maverick

Checking current pricing…

What's different

Only capabilities that differ between these models are listed. Green highlights the broader supported option or larger context window.

Context window

kimi-k2.6

262,000 tokens

llama-4-maverickBetter fit

1,048,576 tokens

Input formats

kimi-k2.6

text, json

llama-4-maverick

text, image

Vision

kimi-k2.6

Not supported

llama-4-maverickBetter fit

Supported

JSON mode

kimi-k2.6Better fit

Supported

llama-4-maverick

Not supported

Reasoning

kimi-k2.6Better fit

Supported

llama-4-maverick

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.

Below 50%50–79%80–94%95%+

kimi-k2.6 · leads in 24

54%

Moderate

llama-4-maverick · leads in 5

40%

Weak

Knowledge & reasoning

  • General knowledge

    kimi-k2.647%
    llama-4-maverickLeads60%
  • Logical reasoning

    kimi-k2.6Leads60%
    llama-4-maverick26%
  • Mathematics

    kimi-k2.6Leads67%
    llama-4-maverick36%
  • Scientific and technical depth

    kimi-k2.6Leads53%
    llama-4-maverick45%
  • Planning and task decomposition

    kimi-k2.6Leads59%
    llama-4-maverick25%

Coding & tools

  • Code generation

    kimi-k2.6Leads50%
    llama-4-maverick36%
  • Debugging and code review

    kimi-k2.6Leads58%
    llama-4-maverick33%
  • Agentic coding

    kimi-k2.6Leads60%
    llama-4-maverick34%
  • Tool and function calling

    kimi-k2.6Leads56%
    llama-4-maverick36%
  • SQL and query writing

    kimi-k2.6Leads59%
    llama-4-maverick34%

Writing & language

  • Creative writing

    kimi-k2.644%
    llama-4-maverickLeads48%
  • Professional writing

    kimi-k2.6Leads49%
    llama-4-maverick39%
  • Conversational quality

    kimi-k2.6Leads51%
    llama-4-maverick38%
  • Multilingual ability

    kimi-k2.6Leads65%
    llama-4-maverick62%
  • Translation

    kimi-k2.6Leads57%
    llama-4-maverick47%
  • Summarization

    kimi-k2.654%
    llama-4-maverickLeads57%

Data & professional work

  • Data analysis

    kimi-k2.6Leads62%
    llama-4-maverick38%
  • Professional domains

    kimi-k2.6Leads50%
    llama-4-maverick41%
  • Information extraction

    kimi-k2.6Leads64%
    llama-4-maverick27%
  • Classification and labeling

    kimi-k2.6Leads55%
    llama-4-maverick49%
  • Long-context handling

    kimi-k2.654%
    llama-4-maverickLeads89%

Reliability & control

  • Instruction following

    kimi-k2.6Leads55%
    llama-4-maverick19%
  • Structured output

    kimi-k2.6Leads67%
    llama-4-maverick7%
  • Factual accuracy

    kimi-k2.6Leads51%
    llama-4-maverick44%
  • Safety and alignment

    kimi-k2.6Leads43%
    llama-4-maverick41%
  • Steerability

    kimi-k2.6Leads48%
    llama-4-maverick31%
  • Output consistency

    kimi-k2.6Leads56%
    llama-4-maverick41%

Speed, cost & vision

  • Response speed

    kimi-k2.637%
    llama-4-maverickLeads45%
  • Cost efficiency

    kimi-k2.6Leads47%
    llama-4-maverick46%
  • Image understanding

    kimi-k2.6No image input
    llama-4-maverick25%

Latest LLM7 statistics

Recent aggregated percentages and response-time metrics from LLM7, not a global model benchmark or traffic disclosure.

Recent stability

kimi-k2.6

100%

llama-4-maverick

95.34%

Average response time

kimi-k2.6

12,518.72 ms

llama-4-maverick

4,496.14 ms

P95 API latency

kimi-k2.6

30,000 ms

llama-4-maverick

10,000 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

kimi-k2.6: 100%llama-4-maverick: 100%
22 Sept21 Oct

Average API latency

Both models on the same scale

kimi-k2.6: 16,670 msllama-4-maverick: 4,572 ms
22 Sept21 Oct

P95 API latency

Both models on the same scale

kimi-k2.6: 60,000 msllama-4-maverick: 5,000 ms
22 Sept21 Oct

Estimate your workload

Published rates are loaded from the pricing API; per-request quotes are billed from actual provider usage.

Checking current pricing…
Checking current pricing…

Quick take

  • llama-4-maverick has a larger context window.
  • llama-4-maverick supports image input while the other model does not.
  • kimi-k2.6 recorded higher recent LLM7 stability during this period.
  • llama-4-maverick recorded a lower observed p95 API latency on LLM7 during this period.

Keep exploring