Model comparison
GPT-5.4 nano vs Kimi K2.6
Kimi K2.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.7 to 41.9 on the Noometry Index. GPT-5.4 nano costs 3.7× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Kimi K2.6's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 36 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 36 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-5.4 nano scores higher in 1 category and Kimi K2.6 in 8 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Kimi K2.6 leads 40.5 to 23.7.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is SimpleQA Verified: 11.7% for GPT-5.4 nano and 34.9% for Kimi K2.6.
- GPT-5.4 nano is cheaper at $0.20 / $1.25 per million input/output tokens, against $0.95 / $4 for Kimi K2.6.
- GPT-5.4 nano accepts more context: 400K tokens versus 262K.
- Kimi K2.6 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| GPT-5.4 nano | Kimi K2.6 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Moonshot AI |
| Noometry Index | 41.9 | 47.7 |
| Released | 2026-03-17 | 2026-04-20 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 400K | 262K |
| Max output | 128K | 262K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.20 | $0.95 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $1.25 | $4 |
| Results tracked | 40 | 51 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Kimi K2.6 leads
GPT-5.4 nano: 43.6 (#84), Kimi K2.6: 50.7 (#43)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 nano | Kimi K2.6 |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 46.9% | 53.5% |
| WeirdML | 49.2% | 55.9% |
| LMArena Coding | 1405 | 1488 |
| ALE-Bench | 1,005 | 1,093 |
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 76.7% |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1509 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
GPT-5.4 nano: —, Kimi K2.6: 21.9 (#137)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 nano | Kimi K2.6 |
|---|---|---|
| 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-5.4 nano: 23.7 (#173), Kimi K2.6: 40.5 (#55)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 nano | Kimi K2.6 |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 9.3% | 8% |
| Chess Puzzles | 30% | 26% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1381 | 1470 |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 9% | 18% |
| DTBench | 80.3% | 90.9% |
| LMCA | 36.9% | 37.3% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 145.81 | 151.05 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 5.7% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 39.7% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 87.2% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 51.5% | — |
| EBR-Bench | — | 2.4% |
| ForecastBench | 57.3 | — |
Math Kimi K2.6 leads
GPT-5.4 nano: 40.9 (#88), Kimi K2.6: 57.0 (#41)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 nano | Kimi K2.6 |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 44.9% | 57.2% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 12.2% | 25.6% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 87.8% | 96.1% |
| ProofBench | 5% | 16% |
| LMArena Math | 1406 | 1475 |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 25.9% | 39% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 6.3% | 14.6% |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | — | 72.9% |
Knowledge Kimi K2.6 leads
GPT-5.4 nano: 41.9 (#103), Kimi K2.6: 54.0 (#54)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 nano | Kimi K2.6 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 78.5% | 90.8% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 11.7% | 34.9% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 3.1% | 10.8% |
| LMArena Expert | 1396 | 1491 |
Multimodal GPT-5.4 nano leads
GPT-5.4 nano: 36.7 (#78), Kimi K2.6: 31.6 (#103)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 nano | Kimi K2.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1196 | 1283 |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | — | 3.9% |
| Furniture Assembly | — | 21.7% |
| LMArena Document | — | 1451 |
Multilingual Kimi K2.6 leads
GPT-5.4 nano: 48.6 (#140), Kimi K2.6: 54.9 (#37)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 nano | Kimi K2.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1359 | 1446 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1392 | 1521 |
| LMArena French | 1396 | 1471 |
| LMArena German | 1367 | 1450 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1343 | 1443 |
| LMArena Korean | 1320 | 1427 |
| LMArena Russian | 1363 | 1446 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1371 | 1464 |
Instruction Following Kimi K2.6 leads
GPT-5.4 nano: 71.9 (#144), Kimi K2.6: 76.3 (#43)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 nano | Kimi K2.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1362 | 1451 |
Long Context Kimi K2.6 leads
GPT-5.4 nano: 41.6 (#137), Kimi K2.6: 44.9 (#52)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 nano | Kimi K2.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1366 | 1468 |
Writing & Preference Kimi K2.6 leads
GPT-5.4 nano: 55.7 (#142), Kimi K2.6: 68.5 (#26)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 nano | Kimi K2.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1372 | 1455 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1314 | 1434 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1382 | 1453 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1725 |
| EQ-Bench 4 | — | 1202 |
Frequently asked questions
Is GPT-5.4 nano better than Kimi K2.6?
Kimi K2.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.7 to 41.9 on the Noometry Index. GPT-5.4 nano costs 3.7× 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-5.4 nano or Kimi K2.6?
GPT-5.4 nano is cheaper. It lists at $0.20 per million input tokens and $1.25 per million output tokens; Kimi K2.6 lists at $0.95 and $4.
Is GPT-5.4 nano or Kimi K2.6 better for coding?
Kimi K2.6 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 50.7 versus 43.6 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
GPT-5.4 nano does, with 400K tokens against 262K.
How many benchmarks do GPT-5.4 nano and Kimi K2.6 share?
36 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5.4 nano has 40 scored results on Noometry and Kimi K2.6 has 51.