Model comparison
Kimi K2.6 vs Llama 3.1-405B
Kimi K2.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.5 to 30.4 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 23 shared benchmarks.
MetaSummary
- They share 23 benchmarks with published results for both. Kimi K2.6 scores higher in 9 categories and Llama 3.1-405B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Kimi K2.6 leads 56.8 to 17.3.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 96.1% for Kimi K2.6 and 9.7% for Llama 3.1-405B.
Side by side
| Kimi K2.6 | Llama 3.1-405B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Moonshot AI | Meta |
| Noometry Index | 47.5 | 30.4 |
| Released | 2026-04-20 | 2024-07-23 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 262K | — |
| Max output | 262K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.95 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $4 | — |
| Results tracked | 51 | 42 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Kimi K2.6 leads
Kimi K2.6: 50.5 (#41), Llama 3.1-405B: 32.7 (#257)
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.6 | Llama 3.1-405B |
|---|---|---|
| WeirdML | 55.9% | 21.4% |
| LMArena Coding | 1488 | 1291 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 76.7% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1509 | — |
| SciCode | 53.5% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 1,093 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Too close to call
Kimi K2.6: 21.8 (#128), Llama 3.1-405B: 20.9 (#131)
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.6 | Llama 3.1-405B |
|---|---|---|
| OSWorld 2.0 | 4.6% | — |
| TheAgentCompany | — | 7.4% |
| Cybench | — | 7.5% |
| ExploitBench | 18.4% | — |
| GBAEval | 0.9% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 12% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 6,205 | — |
Reasoning Kimi K2.6 leads
Kimi K2.6: 39.6 (#51), Llama 3.1-405B: 16.4 (#293)
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.6 | Llama 3.1-405B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1470 | 1270 |
| DTBench | 90.9% | 61.4% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 151.03 | 128.76 |
| SimpleBench | — | 23% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 45% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 87.2% | — |
| CritPt | 8% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 26% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 2.4% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 18% | — |
| LMCA | 37.3% | — |
| BIG-Bench Hard | — | 82.9% |
| ForecastBench | — | 59.9 |
| HellaSwag | — | 89.2% |
| PIQA | — | 85.9% |
| WinoGrande | — | 89.2% |
Math Kimi K2.6 leads
Kimi K2.6: 56.8 (#34), Llama 3.1-405B: 17.3 (#283)
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.6 | Llama 3.1-405B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 96.1% | 9.7% |
| LMArena Math | 1475 | 1281 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 57.2% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 25.6% | — |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 72.9% | — |
| ProofBench | 16% | — |
| Omni-MATH | — | 24.9% |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 49.8% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 39% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 14.6% | — |
Knowledge Kimi K2.6 leads
Kimi K2.6: 53.9 (#48), Llama 3.1-405B: 30.4 (#221)
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.6 | Llama 3.1-405B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 90.8% | 50.9% |
| LMArena Expert | 1491 | 1243 |
| SimpleQA Verified | 34.9% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 72.3% |
| Confabulations | — | 17.6% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 10.8% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 52.2% |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 95.3% |
| MMLU | — | 84.5% |
| TriviaQA | — | 82.7% |
Multimodal Not comparable
Kimi K2.6: 31.8 (#95), Llama 3.1-405B: —
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.6 | Llama 3.1-405B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1282 | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 3.9% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 21.7% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1451 | — |
Multilingual Kimi K2.6 leads
Kimi K2.6: 55.1 (#35), Llama 3.1-405B: 40.9 (#209)
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.6 | Llama 3.1-405B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1446 | 1248 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1521 | 1242 |
| LMArena French | 1471 | 1278 |
| LMArena German | 1449 | 1252 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1442 | 1208 |
| LMArena Korean | 1428 | 1184 |
| LMArena Russian | 1446 | 1265 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1463 | 1259 |
Instruction Following Kimi K2.6 leads
Kimi K2.6: 76.5 (#40), Llama 3.1-405B: 66.1 (#209)
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.6 | Llama 3.1-405B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1451 | 1259 |
| IFEval | — | 81.1% |
Long Context Kimi K2.6 leads
Kimi K2.6: 44.9 (#50), Llama 3.1-405B: 38.4 (#192)
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.6 | Llama 3.1-405B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1468 | 1266 |
Writing & Preference Kimi K2.6 leads
Kimi K2.6: 68.7 (#25), Llama 3.1-405B: 39.1 (#246)
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.6 | Llama 3.1-405B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1455 | 1284 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1434 | 1262 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1725 | 870 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1453 | 1297 |
| WildBench | — | 78.3% |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1202 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Kimi K2.6 better than Llama 3.1-405B?
Kimi K2.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.5 to 30.4 on the Noometry Index.
Is Kimi K2.6 or Llama 3.1-405B better for coding?
Kimi K2.6 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 50.5 versus 32.7 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Kimi K2.6 and Llama 3.1-405B share?
23 benchmarks have published results for both models. Kimi K2.6 has 51 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.1-405B has 42.