Noometry

Model comparison

Kimi K2.6 vs Olmo 3.1 32b Think

Kimi K2.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.7 to 37.9 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 15 shared benchmarks.

Kimi K2.6 Moonshot AI

47.7

Rank #60 Confirmed

Olmo 3.1 32b Think Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)

37.9

Rank #191 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 15 benchmarks with published results for both. Kimi K2.6 scores higher in 8 categories and Olmo 3.1 32b Think 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 46.2.

Side by side

Kimi K2.6Olmo 3.1 32b Think
ProviderMoonshot AIAllen Institute for AI (Ai2)
Noometry Index47.737.9
Released2026-04-20—
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window262K—
Max output262K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.95—
Output $ / M tokens$4—
Results tracked5115

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), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 37.7 (#189)

BenchmarkKimi K2.6Olmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Coding14881291
SWE-bench Verified76.7%—
LMArena WebDev1509—
SciCode53.5%—
WeirdML55.9%—
ALE-Bench1,093—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Kimi K2.6: 21.9 (#137), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: —

BenchmarkKimi K2.6Olmo 3.1 32b Think
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), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 25.2 (#150)

BenchmarkKimi K2.6Olmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Hard Prompts14701272
NYT Connections (extended)87.2%—
CritPt8%—
Chess Puzzles26%—
EBR-Bench2.4%—
Mystery Game Puzzles18%—
DTBench90.9%—
LMCA37.3%—
Epoch Capabilities Index151.05—

Math Kimi K2.6 leads

Kimi K2.6: 57.0 (#41), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 36.3 (#168)

BenchmarkKimi K2.6Olmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Math14751305
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)57.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 425.6%—
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions72.9%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202596.1%—
ProofBench16%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)39%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)14.6%—

Knowledge Kimi K2.6 leads

Kimi K2.6: 54.0 (#54), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 35.7 (#181)

BenchmarkKimi K2.6Olmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Expert14911295
GPQA Diamond90.8%—
SimpleQA Verified34.9%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate10.8%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Kimi K2.6: 31.6 (#103), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: —

BenchmarkKimi K2.6Olmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Vision1283—
Blueprint-Bench 23.9%—
Furniture Assembly21.7%—
LMArena Document1451—

Multilingual Kimi K2.6 leads

Kimi K2.6: 54.9 (#37), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.1 (#231)

BenchmarkKimi K2.6Olmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Non-English14461209
LMArena Chinese15211242
LMArena French14711260
LMArena German14501262
LMArena Russian14461193
LMArena Spanish14641289
LMArena Japanese1443—
LMArena Korean1427—

Instruction Following Kimi K2.6 leads

Kimi K2.6: 76.3 (#43), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 65.6 (#218)

BenchmarkKimi K2.6Olmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Instruction Following14511247

Long Context Kimi K2.6 leads

Kimi K2.6: 44.9 (#52), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.6 (#195)

BenchmarkKimi K2.6Olmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Longer Query14681272

Writing & Preference Kimi K2.6 leads

Kimi K2.6: 68.5 (#26), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 46.2 (#220)

BenchmarkKimi K2.6Olmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Text14551272
LMArena Creative Writing14341226
LMArena Multi-Turn14531252
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1725—
EQ-Bench 41202—

Frequently asked questions

Is Kimi K2.6 better than Olmo 3.1 32b Think?

Kimi K2.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.7 to 37.9 on the Noometry Index.

Is Kimi K2.6 or Olmo 3.1 32b Think better for coding?

Kimi K2.6 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 50.7 versus 37.7 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Kimi K2.6 and Olmo 3.1 32b Think share?

15 benchmarks have published results for both models. Kimi K2.6 has 51 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3.1 32b Think has 15.

Related comparisons

Go deeper