Model comparison
GPT-4.1 nano vs Kimi K2.6
Kimi K2.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.7 to 27.9 on the Noometry Index. GPT-4.1 nano costs 9.8× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Kimi K2.6's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 26 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 26 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-4.1 nano scores higher in 1 category and Kimi K2.6 in 9 categories; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Kimi K2.6 leads 54.0 to 21.8.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 28.9% for GPT-4.1 nano and 96.1% for Kimi K2.6.
- GPT-4.1 nano is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.40 per million input/output tokens, against $0.95 / $4 for Kimi K2.6.
- GPT-4.1 nano accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 262K.
- Kimi K2.6 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| GPT-4.1 nano | Kimi K2.6 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Moonshot AI |
| Noometry Index | 27.9 | 47.7 |
| Released | 2025-04-14 | 2026-04-20 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 1.05M | 262K |
| Max output | 33K | 262K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.10 | $0.95 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.40 | $4 |
| Results tracked | 38 | 51 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Kimi K2.6 leads
GPT-4.1 nano: 24.1 (#330), Kimi K2.6: 50.7 (#43)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Kimi K2.6 |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 25.9% | 53.5% |
| WeirdML | 19% | 55.9% |
| LMArena Coding | 1306 | 1488 |
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 76.7% |
| Aider Polyglot | 8.9% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1509 |
| ALE-Bench | — | 1,093 |
Agentic & Tool Use GPT-4.1 nano leads
GPT-4.1 nano: 26.5 (#104), Kimi K2.6: 21.9 (#137)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Kimi K2.6 |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 33% | — |
| OSWorld 2.0 | — | 4.6% |
| ExploitBench | — | 18.4% |
| GBAEval | — | 0.9% |
| GDP.pdf | — | 12% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 6,205 |
Reasoning Kimi K2.6 leads
GPT-4.1 nano: 8.5 (#349), Kimi K2.6: 40.5 (#55)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Kimi K2.6 |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 0% | 8% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1286 | 1470 |
| DTBench | 52.5% | 90.9% |
| LMCA | 5.5% | 37.3% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 129.62 | 151.05 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 0% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 33.3% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 87.2% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 0% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 26% |
| EBR-Bench | — | 2.4% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 18% |
Math Kimi K2.6 leads
GPT-4.1 nano: 26.9 (#252), Kimi K2.6: 57.0 (#41)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Kimi K2.6 |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 28.9% | 96.1% |
| LMArena Math | 1274 | 1475 |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 1% | 39% |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 57.2% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 25.6% |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | — | 72.9% |
| ProofBench | — | 16% |
| Omni-MATH | 36.7% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 70% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 14.6% |
Knowledge Kimi K2.6 leads
GPT-4.1 nano: 21.8 (#273), Kimi K2.6: 54.0 (#54)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Kimi K2.6 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 48.9% | 90.8% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 6% | 34.9% |
| LMArena Expert | 1272 | 1491 |
| MMLU-Pro | 55% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 10.8% |
| GPQA (HELM) | 50.7% | — |
Multimodal Kimi K2.6 leads
GPT-4.1 nano: 29.2 (#113), Kimi K2.6: 31.6 (#103)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Kimi K2.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1063 | 1283 |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | — | 3.9% |
| Furniture Assembly | — | 21.7% |
| LMArena Document | — | 1451 |
Multilingual Kimi K2.6 leads
GPT-4.1 nano: 41.6 (#205), Kimi K2.6: 54.9 (#37)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Kimi K2.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1260 | 1446 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1270 | 1521 |
| LMArena German | 1288 | 1450 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1198 | 1443 |
| LMArena Russian | 1261 | 1446 |
| LMArena French | — | 1471 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1427 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1464 |
Instruction Following Kimi K2.6 leads
GPT-4.1 nano: 67.8 (#193), Kimi K2.6: 76.3 (#43)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Kimi K2.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1267 | 1451 |
| IFEval | 84.3% | — |
Long Context Kimi K2.6 leads
GPT-4.1 nano: 23.7 (#296), Kimi K2.6: 44.9 (#52)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Kimi K2.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1283 | 1468 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 25% | — |
Writing & Preference Kimi K2.6 leads
GPT-4.1 nano: 40.5 (#243), Kimi K2.6: 68.5 (#26)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Kimi K2.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1285 | 1455 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1260 | 1434 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 946 | 1725 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1277 | 1453 |
| WildBench | 81.2% | — |
| EQ-Bench 4 | — | 1202 |
Frequently asked questions
Is GPT-4.1 nano better than Kimi K2.6?
Kimi K2.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.7 to 27.9 on the Noometry Index. GPT-4.1 nano costs 9.8× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Kimi K2.6's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, GPT-4.1 nano or Kimi K2.6?
GPT-4.1 nano is cheaper. It lists at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; Kimi K2.6 lists at $0.95 and $4.
Is GPT-4.1 nano or Kimi K2.6 better for coding?
Kimi K2.6 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 50.7 versus 24.1 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
GPT-4.1 nano does, with 1.05M tokens against 262K.
How many benchmarks do GPT-4.1 nano and Kimi K2.6 share?
26 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-4.1 nano has 38 scored results on Noometry and Kimi K2.6 has 51.