Model comparison

Kimi K2.6 vs Llama 2-13B

Kimi K2.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.7 to 29.6 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 20 shared benchmarks.

Kimi K2.6 Moonshot AI

47.7

Rank #60 Confirmed

Llama 2-13B Meta

29.6

Rank #309 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 20 benchmarks with published results for both. Kimi K2.6 scores higher in 8 categories and Llama 2-13B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Kimi K2.6 leads 68.5 to 29.8.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is DTBench: 90.9% for Kimi K2.6 and 42.2% for Llama 2-13B.

Side by side

Kimi K2.6 and Llama 2-13B specifications
Kimi K2.6Llama 2-13B
ProviderMoonshot AIMeta
Noometry Index47.729.6
Released2026-04-202023-07-18
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window262K—
Max output262K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.95—
Output $ / M tokens$4—
Results tracked5132

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

Category by category

Coding Kimi K2.6 leads

Kimi K2.6: 50.7 (#43), Llama 2-13B: 30.9 (#291)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkKimi K2.6Llama 2-13B
LMArena Coding14881062
SWE-bench Verified76.7%—
LMArena WebDev1509—
SciCode53.5%—
WeirdML55.9%—
ALE-Bench1,093—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Kimi K2.6: 21.9 (#137), Llama 2-13B: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkKimi K2.6Llama 2-13B
OSWorld 2.04.6%—
ExploitBench18.4%—
GBAEval0.9%—
GDP.pdf12%—
Vending-Bench 26,205—

Reasoning Kimi K2.6 leads

Kimi K2.6: 40.5 (#55), Llama 2-13B: 12.8 (#337)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkKimi K2.6Llama 2-13B
Chess Puzzles26%0%
LMArena Hard Prompts14701051
DTBench90.9%42.2%
Epoch Capabilities Index151.05106.17
NYT Connections (extended)87.2%—
CritPt8%—
EBR-Bench2.4%—
Mystery Game Puzzles18%—
LMCA37.3%—
BIG-Bench Hard—58.2%
HellaSwag—80.7%
LAMBADA—76.5%
PIQA—80.8%
WinoGrande—72.8%

Math Kimi K2.6 leads

Kimi K2.6: 57.0 (#41), Llama 2-13B: 31.1 (#229)

Knowledge Kimi K2.6 leads

Kimi K2.6: 54.0 (#54), Llama 2-13B: 28.1 (#249)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkKimi K2.6Llama 2-13B
LMArena Expert14911030
GPQA Diamond90.8%—
SimpleQA Verified34.9%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate10.8%—
ARC (AI2) Challenge—60.3%
BoolQ—82.4%
MMLU—55.6%
OpenBookQA—57%
TriviaQA—79.6%

Multimodal Not comparable

Kimi K2.6: 31.6 (#103), Llama 2-13B: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkKimi K2.6Llama 2-13B
LMArena Vision1283—
Blueprint-Bench 23.9%—
Furniture Assembly21.7%—
LMArena Document1451—
ScienceQA—55.8%

Multilingual Kimi K2.6 leads

Kimi K2.6: 54.9 (#37), Llama 2-13B: 26.5 (#279)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkKimi K2.6Llama 2-13B
LMArena Non-English14461024
LMArena Chinese15211001
LMArena French14711044
LMArena German14501009
LMArena Japanese1443894
LMArena Korean1427953
LMArena Russian14461055
LMArena Spanish14641087

Instruction Following Kimi K2.6 leads

Kimi K2.6: 76.3 (#43), Llama 2-13B: 53.3 (#287)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkKimi K2.6Llama 2-13B
LMArena Instruction Following14511045

Long Context Kimi K2.6 leads

Kimi K2.6: 44.9 (#52), Llama 2-13B: 32.3 (#269)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkKimi K2.6Llama 2-13B
LMArena Longer Query14681064

Writing & Preference Kimi K2.6 leads

Kimi K2.6: 68.5 (#26), Llama 2-13B: 29.8 (#289)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkKimi K2.6Llama 2-13B
LMArena Text14551084
LMArena Creative Writing14341047
LMArena Multi-Turn14531050
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1725—
EQ-Bench 41202—

Frequently asked questions

Is Kimi K2.6 better than Llama 2-13B?

Kimi K2.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.7 to 29.6 on the Noometry Index.

Is Kimi K2.6 or Llama 2-13B better for coding?

Kimi K2.6 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 50.7 versus 30.9 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Kimi K2.6 and Llama 2-13B share?

20 benchmarks have published results for both models. Kimi K2.6 has 51 scored results on Noometry and Llama 2-13B has 32.

Related comparisons

Go deeper