Model comparison
Kimi K2.6 vs Olmo 3 32b Think
Kimi K2.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.7 to 38.7 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 14 shared benchmarks.
Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)Summary
- They share 14 benchmarks with published results for both. Kimi K2.6 scores higher in 8 categories and Olmo 3 32b Think in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Kimi K2.6 leads 57.0 to 36.5.
Side by side
| Kimi K2.6 | Olmo 3 32b Think | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Moonshot AI | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) |
| Noometry Index | 47.7 | 38.7 |
| Released | 2026-04-20 | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 262K | — |
| Max output | 262K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.95 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $4 | — |
| Results tracked | 51 | 14 |
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 32b Think: 38.6 (#172)
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.6 | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1488 | 1319 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 76.7% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1509 | — |
| SciCode | 53.5% | — |
| WeirdML | 55.9% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 1,093 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Kimi K2.6: 21.9 (#137), Olmo 3 32b Think: —
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.6 | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| OSWorld 2.0 | 4.6% | — |
| ExploitBench | 18.4% | — |
| GBAEval | 0.9% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 12% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 6,205 | — |
Reasoning Kimi K2.6 leads
Kimi K2.6: 40.5 (#55), Olmo 3 32b Think: 25.9 (#140)
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.6 | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1470 | 1302 |
| 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 | 151.05 | — |
Math Kimi K2.6 leads
Kimi K2.6: 57.0 (#41), Olmo 3 32b Think: 36.5 (#165)
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.6 | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1475 | 1316 |
| 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
Kimi K2.6: 54.0 (#54), Olmo 3 32b Think: 35.0 (#190)
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.6 | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1491 | 1273 |
| GPQA Diamond | 90.8% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 34.9% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 10.8% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Kimi K2.6: 31.6 (#103), Olmo 3 32b Think: —
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.6 | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1283 | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 3.9% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 21.7% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1451 | — |
Multilingual Kimi K2.6 leads
Kimi K2.6: 54.9 (#37), Olmo 3 32b Think: 41.2 (#210)
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.6 | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1446 | 1255 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1521 | 1300 |
| LMArena French | 1471 | 1291 |
| LMArena German | 1450 | 1290 |
| LMArena Russian | 1446 | 1254 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1443 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1427 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1464 | — |
Instruction Following Kimi K2.6 leads
Kimi K2.6: 76.3 (#43), Olmo 3 32b Think: 67.2 (#198)
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.6 | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1451 | 1275 |
Long Context Kimi K2.6 leads
Kimi K2.6: 44.9 (#52), Olmo 3 32b Think: 39.4 (#182)
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.6 | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1468 | 1296 |
Writing & Preference Kimi K2.6 leads
Kimi K2.6: 68.5 (#26), Olmo 3 32b Think: 49.1 (#193)
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.6 | Olmo 3 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1455 | 1300 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1434 | 1256 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1453 | 1290 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1725 | — |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1202 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Kimi K2.6 better than Olmo 3 32b Think?
Kimi K2.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.7 to 38.7 on the Noometry Index.
Is Kimi K2.6 or Olmo 3 32b Think better for coding?
Kimi K2.6 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 50.7 versus 38.6 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Kimi K2.6 and Olmo 3 32b Think share?
14 benchmarks have published results for both models. Kimi K2.6 has 51 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3 32b Think has 14.