Model comparison

Kimi K2.6 vs Qwen3-4B

Kimi K2.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.7 to 31.9 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 5 shared benchmarks.

Kimi K2.6 Moonshot AI

47.7

Rank #60 Confirmed

Qwen3-4B Alibaba (Qwen)

31.9

Rank #264 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 5 benchmarks with published results for both. Kimi K2.6 scores higher in 3 categories and Qwen3-4B in 1 category; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Kimi K2.6 leads 57.0 to 29.7.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 96.1% for Kimi K2.6 and 52.2% for Qwen3-4B.

Side by side

Kimi K2.6 and Qwen3-4B specifications
Kimi K2.6Qwen3-4B
ProviderMoonshot AIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index47.731.9
Released2026-04-202025-04-29
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window262K—
Max output262K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.95—
Output $ / M tokens$4—
Results tracked516

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

Kimi K2.6: 50.7 (#43), Qwen3-4B: —

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkKimi K2.6Qwen3-4B
SWE-bench Verified76.7%—
LMArena WebDev1509—
SciCode53.5%—
WeirdML55.9%—
LMArena Coding1488—
ALE-Bench1,093—

Agentic & Tool Use Qwen3-4B leads

Kimi K2.6: 21.9 (#137), Qwen3-4B: 27.6 (#100)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkKimi K2.6Qwen3-4B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—35.7%
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), Qwen3-4B: 19.2 (#268)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkKimi K2.6Qwen3-4B
Chess Puzzles26%4%
NYT Connections (extended)87.2%—
CritPt8%—
EBR-Bench2.4%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1470—
Mystery Game Puzzles18%—
DTBench90.9%—
LMCA37.3%—
Epoch Capabilities Index151.05—

Math Kimi K2.6 leads

Kimi K2.6: 57.0 (#41), Qwen3-4B: 29.7 (#240)

Knowledge Kimi K2.6 leads

Kimi K2.6: 54.0 (#54), Qwen3-4B: 33.0 (#208)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkKimi K2.6Qwen3-4B
GPQA Diamond90.8%52.3%
Vectara Hallucination Rate10.8%5.7%
SimpleQA Verified34.9%—
LMArena Expert1491—

Multimodal Not comparable

Kimi K2.6: 31.6 (#103), Qwen3-4B: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkKimi K2.6Qwen3-4B
LMArena Vision1283—
Blueprint-Bench 23.9%—
Furniture Assembly21.7%—
LMArena Document1451—

Multilingual Not comparable

Kimi K2.6: 54.9 (#37), Qwen3-4B: —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkKimi K2.6Qwen3-4B
LMArena Non-English1446—
LMArena Chinese1521—
LMArena French1471—
LMArena German1450—
LMArena Japanese1443—
LMArena Korean1427—
LMArena Russian1446—
LMArena Spanish1464—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Kimi K2.6: 76.3 (#43), Qwen3-4B: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkKimi K2.6Qwen3-4B
LMArena Instruction Following1451—

Long Context Not comparable

Kimi K2.6: 44.9 (#52), Qwen3-4B: —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkKimi K2.6Qwen3-4B
LMArena Longer Query1468—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Kimi K2.6: 68.5 (#26), Qwen3-4B: —

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkKimi K2.6Qwen3-4B
LMArena Text1455—
LMArena Creative Writing1434—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1725—
EQ-Bench 41202—
LMArena Multi-Turn1453—

Frequently asked questions

Is Kimi K2.6 better than Qwen3-4B?

Kimi K2.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.7 to 31.9 on the Noometry Index.

How many benchmarks do Kimi K2.6 and Qwen3-4B share?

5 benchmarks have published results for both models. Kimi K2.6 has 51 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3-4B has 6.

Related comparisons

Go deeper