Undominated.ai

Model comparison · accepted catalogue facts 2026-09-23

Kimi K2.6 vs Kimi K3

Neither model has both an equal-or-higher measured score and an equal-or-lower estimated price in this pair. Retaining your current model is a valid outcome.

Editorial comparison: Generation change and preserved-thinking contract Inclusion does not recommend either model.

Kimi K2.6

LMArena general · Elo · higher is better

Scale starts at 1040 Elo

1454.9

Balanced effective USD / 1M tokens · lower is better

$1.71/M

Kimi K3

LMArena general · Elo · higher is better

Scale starts at 1040 Elo

1472.3

Balanced effective USD / 1M tokens · lower is better

$6.00/M

Compare · model decision

Choose two or three models

Inspect the differences, estimate your workload and keep the evidence. All standard catalogue models are available, including unrated ones.

Catalogue facts
2026-09-23

2 / 3 selected · 0 requirements
Open public comparison link
Public workload and requirements

These settings are included in the share link. The fixed-request scenario and private evaluation data below are excluded.

A ↔ B

Neither model has both an equal-or-higher measured score and an equal-or-lower estimated price in this pair. Retaining your current model is a valid outcome.

Estimated blend: 75% input, 25% output; 0% cached input. Base context tier. Prompt length selects the billing tier. An unlisted cache-read rate uses that tier’s full input rate in this blend; missing required input or output rates prevent an estimate. The fixed-request estimate below validates actual context and output limits and requires a published cache-read rate when cache hits are assumed.

What changes between these models

Quality first, then estimated price. LMArena scores are human-preference measurements, not a benchmark of your application. A missing score is unrated.

  • Kimi K2.6 · Meets the stated model requirements
  • Kimi K3 · Meets the stated model requirements
Material differences and unknown evidence. Deltas compare each model with model A. Unknown facts remain visible.
Measured factA Kimi K2.6B Kimi K3
LMArena general score (Elo)1,454.91,472.3Δ vs A: +17.4 Elo
Score interval half-width (± Elo)4.525.22Δ vs A: +0.7 Elo
Benchmark reasoning effortdefaultmax
LMArena document score (Elo)1,450.7Unknown
Estimated effective USD / 1M tokens$1.7125$6Δ vs A: +4.2875 USD/M
Base input USD / 1M tokens$0.95$3Δ vs A: +2.05 USD/M
Base output USD / 1M tokens$4$15Δ vs A: +11 USD/M
Base cached-input USD / 1M tokens$0.16$0.3Δ vs A: +0.14 USD/M
Context window (tokens)262,1441,048,576Δ vs A: +786,432 tokens
Output limit (tokens)235,929943,718Δ vs A: +707,789 tokens
Input modalitiestext, imagetext, image, video
Open weightsUnknownSupported
Recorded licenceUnknownmodified-mit
Distinct sellers in the catalogue2117Δ vs A: -4
Recorded retirement dateUnknownUnknown
5 shared measured facts
Shared measured facts. Deltas compare each model with model A. Unknown facts remain visible.
Measured factA Kimi K2.6B Kimi K3
Tool useSupportedSupportedΔ vs A: 0
ReasoningSupportedSupportedΔ vs A: 0
Model providerMoonshot AIMoonshot AI
Serving precision differs across offersSupportedSupportedΔ vs A: 0
Retirement evidenceNone announced; not a guaranteeNone announced; not a guarantee

Provider counts and precision flags describe catalogue offers. They do not establish the precision, availability, region, tool behaviour or limits of your chosen endpoint. Open each model’s provider table before switching.

Complete price ladders and billing conditions

Kimi K2.6

Rates below are USD per 1M tokens. A threshold selects that whole input/output rate pair.

Input-token thresholdInputOutputCached input
Base, up to and including first threshold$0.95$4$0.16

Kimi K3

Rates below are USD per 1M tokens. A threshold selects that whole input/output rate pair.

Input-token thresholdInputOutputCached input
Base, up to and including first threshold$3$15$0.3
Migration preflight · compare each candidate with model A

Keeping Kimi K2.6 is a valid decision. No pairwise comparison certifies a drop-in replacement.

Kimi K2.6 → Kimi K3

No known model-capability loss

  • Provider endpoint, serving precision, availability and task success need your own verification. Catalogue model capabilities do not certify an endpoint.
Check alternatives to Kimi K2.6

Estimate a fixed request shape

Private to this tab unless you save locally or explicitly export private details. These are estimates, not observed invoices. Cross-model token counts and task success are assumptions.

0.1 extra attempts means 10 extra full attempts per 100 requests. Cache writes, tool charges, taxes and unlisted charges are excluded.

  • Kimi K2.6Estimated total: $3.9 1,000 full attempts · base rates
  • Kimi K3Estimated total: $13.5 1,000 full attempts · base rates
Prompt and output sensitivity · sampled scenarios

Every point recalculates the entire request shape. Tier-boundary samples include one token below, at and above each threshold. Ordering between samples is not guaranteed. Lowest known cost excludes unknown estimates and is not a replacement recommendation.

Vary input; hold output, requests, cache and retries fixed.
Input tokensKimi K2.6Kimi K3Coverage
2,000$3.9Lowest known$13.5All computed
4,096$5.8912Lowest known$19.788All computed
32,768$33.1296Lowest known$105.804All computed
131,072$126.5184Lowest known$400.716All computed
Vary output; hold input, requests, cache and retries fixed.
Output tokensKimi K2.6Kimi K3
128$2.412$7.92
2,048$10.092$36.72
8,192$34.668$128.88

Bring your observed evaluation results

JSON is parsed locally. Prompts, filenames, individual responses and extra fields are not retained. Import only aggregate measurements for selected models. Task/version labels do not establish that two evaluations used the same dataset.

Expected format
[{"model":"provider/exact-model-id","task":"support-answer","version":"rubric-1","attempts":100,"successes":84,"costUsd":2.4,"latencyMs":950}]

Use the exact catalogue ID. Replace the example values with observed measurements. Omit costUsd or latencyMs when they are unknown. No public score is inferred from these observations.

Keep the decision and its evidence

A portable record retains selected facts, complete tier ladders, public requirements and the publication manifest. It also embeds the full permitted public catalogue to verify the input artifact checksum. Files are larger for this reason (up to 2 MB); local storage is limited to 12 records. Team review is local to this browser; there is no hosted collaboration.

Saving is opt-in and includes private review fields. Shared comparison links never include them. Version 1 Check references remain separate and are not overwritten or guessed into this format.

Saved local decisions · 0

No version 2 decision records are stored in this browser.

Questions this page answers

Is Kimi K2.6 a better-and-cheaper replacement for Kimi K3?

Neither model has both an equal-or-higher measured score and an equal-or-lower estimated price in this pair. Retaining your current model is a valid outcome.

What is included in this comparison?

Accepted model capabilities, context and output limits, complete price-tier ladders, independent LMArena measurements and missing evidence. Provider endpoint precision and application success still need verification.

Can I compare a different workload or keep a decision record?

Yes. Change the public workload, prompt length and requirements in the comparison workspace. Fixed-request scenarios, aggregate evaluations and review notes stay local unless explicitly exported.

Evidence & Ask