kimi-k2.6
Checking current pricing…
Chat comparison
kimi-k2.6vsminimax-m3
Compare the things that matter before you build: current price, capabilities, and latest aggregated LLM7 statistics.
Current pricing
See the cost difference clearly
minimax-m3
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
minimax-m3Better fit
512,000 tokens
Input formats
kimi-k2.6
text, json
minimax-m3
text
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 25
54%
Moderate
minimax-m3 · leads in 3
47%
Weak
Knowledge & reasoning
General knowledge
kimi-k2.6Leads47%minimax-m335%Logical reasoning
kimi-k2.6Leads60%minimax-m350%Mathematics
kimi-k2.6Leads67%minimax-m351%Scientific and technical depth
kimi-k2.6Leads53%minimax-m342%Planning and task decomposition
kimi-k2.6Leads59%minimax-m352%
Coding & tools
Code generation
kimi-k2.6Leads50%minimax-m337%Debugging and code review
kimi-k2.6Leads58%minimax-m347%Agentic coding
kimi-k2.6Leads60%minimax-m355%Tool and function calling
kimi-k2.6Leads56%minimax-m351%SQL and query writing
kimi-k2.6Leads59%minimax-m348%
Writing & language
Creative writing
kimi-k2.6Leads44%minimax-m338%Professional writing
kimi-k2.6Leads49%minimax-m340%Conversational quality
kimi-k2.6Leads51%minimax-m343%Multilingual ability
kimi-k2.665%minimax-m365%Translation
kimi-k2.6Leads57%minimax-m350%Summarization
kimi-k2.6Leads54%minimax-m348%
Data & professional work
Data analysis
kimi-k2.6Leads62%minimax-m350%Professional domains
kimi-k2.6Leads50%minimax-m343%Information extraction
kimi-k2.6Leads64%minimax-m351%Classification and labeling
kimi-k2.6Leads55%minimax-m351%Long-context handling
kimi-k2.654%minimax-m3Leads59%
Reliability & control
Instruction following
kimi-k2.6Leads55%minimax-m346%Structured output
kimi-k2.6Leads67%minimax-m351%Factual accuracy
kimi-k2.6Leads51%minimax-m337%Safety and alignment
kimi-k2.6Leads43%minimax-m335%Steerability
kimi-k2.6Leads48%minimax-m344%Output consistency
kimi-k2.6Leads56%minimax-m350%
Speed, cost & vision
Response speed
kimi-k2.637%minimax-m3Leads40%Cost efficiency
kimi-k2.647%minimax-m3Leads52%Image understanding
kimi-k2.6No image inputminimax-m3No image input
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%
minimax-m3
99.29%
Average response time
kimi-k2.6
12,518.72 ms
minimax-m3
22,425.83 ms
P95 API latency
kimi-k2.6
30,000 ms
minimax-m3
60,000 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%minimax-m3: 100%
Average API latency
Both models on the same scale
kimi-k2.6: 16,670 msminimax-m3: 27,175 ms
P95 API latency
Both models on the same scale
kimi-k2.6: 60,000 msminimax-m3: 60,000 ms
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
- minimax-m3 has a larger context window.
- The recent stability rates are too close to distinguish meaningfully.
- kimi-k2.6 recorded a lower observed p95 API latency on LLM7 during this period.