Kimi K2.5 vs Grok 4.6

Model Markets Rankings

Intelligence, Cost, and Efficiency

All rankings →
RankingKimi-K2.5Grok 4.6
IntelligenceHigher is better · MM Intelligence v1.2UnrankedNot in the 22-model eligible cohort#13 of 2267.6 score
CostLower is better · Published-token output estimateUnrankedNot in the 36-model eligible cohort#18 of 36$0.097 per LiveBench case
EfficiencyHigher is better · MM Efficiency v1.0UnrankedNot in the 22-model eligible cohort#8 of 2256.6 score

Ranks come from the current complete eligible cohorts. Green highlights appear only when both models are ranked in the same metric. Missing required inputs remain unranked, and the three dimensions are not collapsed into an overall winner.

Benchmark Performance

Available Benchmarks

BenchmarkKimi-K2.5Grok 4.6
LMArena Text Arenatext-2026-09-01-011508720696 · arena_rating · statistical tie1,445.75100% of row best · rating · kimi-k2.5-thinking; 95% CI [1442.41231565, 1449.09515875]; votes 70620; rank 501,443.75100% of row best · rating · grok-4.6-high; 95% CI [1433.62910542, 1453.86294509]; votes 3453; rank 55
Overall ResultCounted from the protocol-matched rows above · 1 tie0 benchmark winsTied overall0 benchmark winsTied overall

Third-party benchmark Only like-for-like primary-publisher results are shown; raw scores, relative scores, configuration, and token spend remain visible.

FieldAt a Glance
Moonshot AI · activeKimi K2.5Verified Aug 28, 2026
xAI · activeGrok 4.6Verified Aug 29, 2026

Technical Differences

Side-by-Side Facts

Indexable
FieldKimi-K2.5Grok 4.6
DeveloperMoonshot AIxAI
FamilyKimi K2 5Grok 4
ModelKimi-K2.5Grok 4.6
VersionKimi-K2.5Grok 4.6
Lifecycleactiveactive
Released2026-01-27Unknown
Knowledge cutoffUnknown2026-02-01
Input modalitiesText, ImageText, Image
Output modalitiesTextText
Context window262K500K
Total parameters1TUnknown
Active parameters32BUnknown
LicenseotherUnknown
Open weightsYesNo
API availableYesYes
Self-hostableYesNo
Provider accessDeepinfra (Standard), Hugging Face (Standard), Openrouter (Standard)Xai (Standard)
Capabilitieschat, generation, reasoning, toolschat, generation, reasoning, tools

13 comparable fields · 8 material differences · Pair passes the primary-source comparison gate

Kimi K2.5 Capabilities

chatgenerationreasoningtools
Input price$0.45
Output price$2.25
Serving providers3
Canonical IDmoonshotai/Kimi-K2.5

Grok 4.6 Capabilities

chatgenerationreasoningtools
Input price$2.00
Output price$6.00
Serving providers1
Canonical IDxai/grok-4.6

Internal Comparison Graph

Related Comparisons

All image comparisons →
APairBContext
vscross-developer peersimage, text
vscross-developer peersimage, text
vscross-developer peerstext
vscross-developer peerstext
vscross-developer peersimage, text
vsfamily variantsembedding, image, text
vscross-developer peersimage, text
vscross-developer peerstext
vscross-developer peerstext
vscross-developer peersimage, text
vscross-developer peersimage, text
vscross-developer peersimage, text

Primary Evidence

Sources and Freshness

Questions

Kimi K2.5 vs Grok 4.6 FAQs

Is Kimi K2.5 or Grok 4.6 better for coding?+

This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Kimi K2.5 and Grok 4.6, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.

Which is cheaper, Kimi K2.5 or Grok 4.6?+

Kimi K2.5 is $0.45 and Grok 4.6 is $2.00 per million tokens, so Kimi K2.5 is cheaper on this metric. Kimi K2.5 is $2.25 and Grok 4.6 is $6.00 per million tokens, so Kimi K2.5 is cheaper on this metric.

Which has a larger context window, Kimi K2.5 or Grok 4.6?+

Grok 4.6 has the larger sourced context window. Kimi K2.5 supports 262K and Grok 4.6 supports 500K.

Which performs better in benchmarks, Kimi K2.5 or Grok 4.6?+

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

Can Kimi K2.5 or Grok 4.6 be self-hosted?+

Kimi K2.5 is the only model in this pair currently marked as self-hostable. Kimi K2.5 is open weight; Grok 4.6 is not marked open weight.

Can Kimi K2.5 and Grok 4.6 understand images?+

Kimi K2.5 is documented with image input; Grok 4.6 is documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.

Which can generate longer answers, Kimi K2.5 or Grok 4.6?+

Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. Kimi K2.5 is — and Grok 4.6 is —.

Do Kimi K2.5 and Grok 4.6 support reasoning and tool use?+

Kimi K2.5: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Grok 4.6: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Feature support does not establish relative quality.

Which is available from more inference providers, Kimi K2.5 or Grok 4.6?+

Kimi K2.5 has 3 sourced provider routes; Grok 4.6 has 1, so Kimi K2.5 has broader tracked availability.

Which offers better value, Kimi K2.5 or Grok 4.6?+

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