Noometry

Model comparison

Hunyuan T1 20250711 vs Kimi K2.6

Kimi K2.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.5 to 41.8 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 13 shared benchmarks.

Hunyuan T1 20250711 Tencent

41.8

Rank #114 Confirmed

Kimi K2.6 Moonshot AI

47.5

Rank #52 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. Hunyuan T1 20250711 scores higher in 0 categories and Kimi K2.6 in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Kimi K2.6 leads 56.8 to 36.0.
  • Kimi K2.6 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Hunyuan T1 20250711Kimi K2.6
ProviderTencentMoonshot AI
Noometry Index41.847.5
Released—2026-04-20
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window—262K
Max output—262K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.95
Output $ / M tokens—$4
Results tracked1351

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Kimi K2.6 leads

Hunyuan T1 20250711: 40.2 (#129), Kimi K2.6: 50.5 (#41)

BenchmarkHunyuan T1 20250711Kimi K2.6
LMArena Coding13891488
SWE-bench Verified—76.7%
LMArena WebDev—1509
SciCode—53.5%
WeirdML—55.9%
ALE-Bench—1,093

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Hunyuan T1 20250711: —, Kimi K2.6: 21.8 (#128)

BenchmarkHunyuan T1 20250711Kimi 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

Hunyuan T1 20250711: 27.3 (#106), Kimi K2.6: 39.6 (#51)

BenchmarkHunyuan T1 20250711Kimi K2.6
LMArena Hard Prompts13991470
NYT Connections (extended)—87.2%
CritPt—8%
Chess Puzzles—26%
EBR-Bench—2.4%
Mystery Game Puzzles—18%
DTBench—90.9%
LMCA—37.3%
Epoch Capabilities Index—151.03

Math Kimi K2.6 leads

Hunyuan T1 20250711: 36.0 (#132), Kimi K2.6: 56.8 (#34)

BenchmarkHunyuan T1 20250711Kimi K2.6
LMArena Math14141475
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—57.2%
FrontierMath Tier 4—25.6%
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions—72.9%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—96.1%
ProofBench—16%
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)—39%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)—14.6%

Knowledge Kimi K2.6 leads

Hunyuan T1 20250711: 38.1 (#139), Kimi K2.6: 53.9 (#48)

BenchmarkHunyuan T1 20250711Kimi K2.6
LMArena Expert13951491
GPQA Diamond—90.8%
SimpleQA Verified—34.9%
Vectara Hallucination Rate—10.8%

Multimodal Not comparable

Hunyuan T1 20250711: —, Kimi K2.6: 31.8 (#95)

BenchmarkHunyuan T1 20250711Kimi K2.6
LMArena Vision—1282
Blueprint-Bench 2—3.9%
Furniture Assembly—21.7%
LMArena Document—1451

Multilingual Kimi K2.6 leads

Hunyuan T1 20250711: 51.4 (#107), Kimi K2.6: 55.1 (#35)

BenchmarkHunyuan T1 20250711Kimi K2.6
LMArena Non-English13951446
LMArena Chinese14241521
LMArena Korean14031428
LMArena Russian13841446
LMArena French—1471
LMArena German—1449
LMArena Japanese—1442
LMArena Spanish—1463

Instruction Following Kimi K2.6 leads

Hunyuan T1 20250711: 72.8 (#130), Kimi K2.6: 76.5 (#40)

BenchmarkHunyuan T1 20250711Kimi K2.6
LMArena Instruction Following13751451

Long Context Kimi K2.6 leads

Hunyuan T1 20250711: 42.2 (#123), Kimi K2.6: 44.9 (#50)

BenchmarkHunyuan T1 20250711Kimi K2.6
LMArena Longer Query13841468

Writing & Preference Kimi K2.6 leads

Hunyuan T1 20250711: 59.7 (#105), Kimi K2.6: 68.7 (#25)

BenchmarkHunyuan T1 20250711Kimi K2.6
LMArena Text14011455
LMArena Creative Writing13911434
LMArena Multi-Turn13931453
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—1725
EQ-Bench 4—1202

Frequently asked questions

Is Hunyuan T1 20250711 better than Kimi K2.6?

Kimi K2.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.5 to 41.8 on the Noometry Index.

Is Hunyuan T1 20250711 or Kimi K2.6 better for coding?

Kimi K2.6 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 50.5 versus 40.2 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Hunyuan T1 20250711 and Kimi K2.6 share?

13 benchmarks have published results for both models. Hunyuan T1 20250711 has 13 scored results on Noometry and Kimi K2.6 has 51.

Related comparisons

Go deeper