Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber vs Kimi K2.6

At a Glance

Compare
Gemini 3.8 Flash CyberGoogle DeepMind
Kimi K2.6Moonshot AI
Intelligence, Cost, and Efficiency
IntelligenceHigher is better · MM Intelligence v2.5UnrankedNot in the 46-model eligible cohort#32 of 4650.5 score · 2/3 sources · provisional · missing ARC-AGI-2 · full-core range 33.6–67.0
CostLower is better · Published-token output estimateUnrankedNot in the 44-model eligible cohort#21 of 44$0.095 per LiveBench case
EfficiencyHigher is better · MM Efficiency v1.5UnrankedNot in the 38-model eligible cohort#24 of 3850.1 score · 2/3 sources · provisional · missing ARC-AGI-2 · full-core range 41.7–58.4
Pricing and Limits
Input priceFrom · USD / 1M tokensNot reported$0.75Deepinfra · Sep 22, 2026
Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokensNot reported$3.50Deepinfra · Sep 22, 2026
Context windowMaximum documented tokensNot reported262K
Model facts checkedSep 2, 2026View model evidence →Aug 28, 2026View model evidence →

Token prices are the lowest available sourced USD rates; input and output may use different providers. Cost ranking estimates output spend on LiveBench, not a full request bill. Ranking methodology →

Available Benchmarks

All benchmark results →
No Protocol-Matched Benchmark Yet.Results appear here only when both models share the same benchmark version, metric, evaluation protocol, and evidence class.

Side-by-Side Facts

FieldGemini 3.8 Flash CyberKimi-K2.6
DeveloperGoogle DeepMindMoonshot AI
FamilyGemini 3Kimi K2 6
ModelGemini 3.8 Flash CyberKimi-K2.6
VersionGemini 3.8 Flash CyberKimi-K2.6
Lifecycleactiveactive
Released2026-09-022026-04-20
Knowledge cutoffUnknownUnknown
Input modalitiesTextText, Image
Output modalitiesTextText
Context windowUnknown262K
Total parametersUnknown1T
Active parametersUnknown32B
LicenseUnknownother
Open weightsNoYes
API availableNoYes
Self-hostableNoYes
Provider accessUnknownDeepinfra (Standard), Fireworks Ai (Standard), Hugging Face (Standard), Openrouter (Standard), Together Ai (Standard)
Capabilitiesautomated-patching, cybersecurity, reasoning, vulnerability-detectionchat, generation, reasoning, tools

Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber Capabilities

automated-patchingcybersecurityreasoningvulnerability-detection
Serving providers0
Canonical IDgoogle-deepmind/gemini-3.8-flash-cyber

Kimi K2.6 Capabilities

chatgenerationreasoningtools
Serving providers5
Canonical IDmoonshotai/Kimi-K2.6

Primary Evidence

Sources and Freshness

Questions

Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber vs Kimi K2.6 FAQs

Is Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber or Kimi K2.6 better for coding?+

This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber and Kimi K2.6, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.

Which is cheaper, Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber or Kimi K2.6?+

Only Kimi K2.6 has a directly sourced input price: $0.75 per million tokens. Only Kimi K2.6 has a directly sourced output price: $3.50 per million tokens.

Which has a larger context window, Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber or Kimi K2.6?+

Neither model has a larger sourced context window in this comparison. Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber is — and Kimi K2.6 is 262K.

Which performs better in benchmarks, Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber or Kimi K2.6?+

There is no overall benchmark winner: At least two independently verified, protocol-matched benchmarks are required for an overall winner.

Can Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber or Kimi K2.6 be self-hosted?+

Kimi K2.6 is the only model in this pair currently marked as self-hostable. Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber is not marked open weight; Kimi K2.6 is open weight.

Can Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber and Kimi K2.6 understand images?+

Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber is not documented with image input; Kimi K2.6 is documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.

Which can generate longer answers, Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber or Kimi K2.6?+

Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber is — and Kimi K2.6 is —.

Do Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber and Kimi K2.6 support reasoning and tool use?+

Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber: reasoning. Kimi K2.6: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Feature support does not establish relative quality.

Which is available from more inference providers, Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber or Kimi K2.6?+

Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber has 0 sourced provider routes; Kimi K2.6 has 5, so Kimi K2.6 has broader tracked availability.

Which offers better value, Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber or Kimi K2.6?+

There is no universal value winner. Compare the input and output prices above with the matched benchmark result for your workload: cheaper tokens can be offset by different quality, token usage, latency, or provider availability.

Send Feedback