Skip to main content
BenchLM
Advertise

Model comparison

DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) vs Kimi K2.6

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 29 shared benchmark results across 7 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

N/A
No comparison
Kimi K2.6
Moonshot AI
56.79/100
3 category wins1 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) unranked (Not scored); Kimi K2.6 #74 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) and Kimi K2.6 share 29 comparable benchmark results. 4 of 8 categories are comparable. 16 results are unique to DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max); 22 to Kimi K2.6.

Updated July 23, 2026
Shared results
29
DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) only
16
Kimi K2.6 only
22
Comparable categories
4 / 8

Treat this as a split decision. DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) makes more sense if mathematics is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill; Kimi K2.6 is the better fit if agentic is the priority.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 29 shared benchmark results across 7 evidence categories; 4 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) and Kimi K2.6 finish on the same BenchAlign overall score, so this is less about a single winner and more about where the edge shows up. The BenchAlign headline says tie; the benchmark table is where the real choice happens.

Kimi K2.6 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $0.95 input / $4.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.14 input / $0.28 output per 1M tokens for DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max). That is roughly 14.3x on output cost alone. DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 256K for Kimi K2.6.

Category breakdown

Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.

Category scores and score margins for DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) and Kimi K2.6
CategoryDeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)ΔKimi K2.6
MathDeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)94.8Margin← 27.7Kimi K2.667.1
KnowledgeDeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)55.3Margin← 13.1Kimi K2.642.2
AgenticDeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)63.8Margin→ 9.7Kimi K2.673.5
CodingDeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)68.8Margin← 4.4Kimi K2.664.4
MultimodalDeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)Not measuredMarginNo overlapKimi K2.679.8

Decisive benchmark drivers

The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.

More
A · DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)B · Kimi K2.6

  1. BrowseComp

    Agentic
    Source ↗
    A 73.2%B 83.2%
    Winner: Kimi K2.6Δ 10
    BrowseComp: DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) scored 73.2%; Kimi K2.6 scored 83.2%. Kimi K2.6 wins this benchmark.

  2. Terminal-Bench 2.0

    Agentic
    Source ↗
    A 56.9%B 66.7%
    Winner: Kimi K2.6Δ 9.8
    Terminal-Bench 2.0: DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) scored 56.9%; Kimi K2.6 scored 66.7%. Kimi K2.6 wins this benchmark.

  3. SWE-bench Pro

    Coding
    Source ↗
    A 52.6%B 58.6%
    Winner: Kimi K2.6Δ 6
    SWE-bench Pro: DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) scored 52.6%; Kimi K2.6 scored 58.6%. Kimi K2.6 wins this benchmark.

  4. GPQA

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 88.1%B 90.5%
    Winner: Kimi K2.6Δ 2.4
    GPQA: DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) scored 88.1%; Kimi K2.6 scored 90.5%. Kimi K2.6 wins this benchmark.

  5. HMMT Feb 2026

    Math
    Source ↗
    A 94.8%B 92.7%
    Winner: DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)Δ 2.1
    HMMT Feb 2026: DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) scored 94.8%; Kimi K2.6 scored 92.7%. DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

MetricDeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)Kimi K2.6Comparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensDeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)$0.14 input / $0.28 outputKimi K2.6$0.95 input / $4 outputDeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per secondDeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)Not availableKimi K2.6Not availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenDeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)Not availableKimi K2.6Not availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensDeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)1MKimi K2.6256KDeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

AgenticKimi K2.6 wins
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)Kimi K2.6Result
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 56.9%66.7%Kimi K2.6 leads
BrowseCompSource 73.2%83.2%Kimi K2.6 leads
HLE w/ toolsSource 45.1%—Not comparable
MCP AtlasSource 69%55.9%DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) leads
GDPval-AASource 11891189Tie
ToolathlonSource 47.8%50%Kimi K2.6 leads
AA Agentic IndexSource 31.1%30.3%DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) leads
τ²-bench resultsSource 95%95.9%Kimi K2.6 leads
GDPval-AASource 34.4%34.5%Kimi K2.6 leads
AA BriefcaseSource 831—Not comparable
AA EnterpriseOps-GymSource 39.6%—Not comparable
AA Harvey LABSource 81.3%—Not comparable
AA ITBenchSource 31.5%—Not comparable
AA Tau3 BankingSource 22.9%—Not comparable
terminalBenchHardSource 35.6%43.9%Kimi K2.6 leads
OSWorld-VerifiedSource —73.1%Not comparable
Claw-EvalSource —62.3%Not comparable
DeepSearchQASource —92.5%Not comparable
WideResearchSource —80.8%Not comparable
APEX-Agents-AASource —28.5%Not comparable
Gert LabsSource —56.82%Not comparable
ResearchClawBenchSource —18.0%Not comparable
OSWorld 2.0Source —4.6%Not comparable
CodingDeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) wins
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)Kimi K2.6Result
CodeforcesSource 3052.0—Not comparable
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 79%80.2%Kimi K2.6 leads
SWE-bench ProSource 52.6%58.6%Kimi K2.6 leads
SWE MultilingualSource 73.3%76.7%Kimi K2.6 leads
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 56.9%66.7%Kimi K2.6 leads
AA Coding IndexSource 56.2%61.8%Kimi K2.6 leads
AA-SciCodeSource 44.9%53.5%Kimi K2.6 leads
LiveCodeBench v6Source —89.6%Not comparable
SciCodeSource —52.2%Not comparable
Vibe Code BenchSource —37.89%Not comparable
cursorBench31Source —47.6%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)Kimi K2.6Result
MRCR 1MSource 78.7%—Not comparable
CorpusQA 1MSource 60.5%—Not comparable
AA-LCRSource 63.0%69.7%Kimi K2.6 leads
CritPtSource 7.1%8.0%Kimi K2.6 leads
KnowledgeDeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) wins
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)Kimi K2.6Result
MMLU-ProSource 86.2%—Not comparable
SimpleQASource 34.1%—Not comparable
Chinese-SimpleQASource 78.9%—Not comparable
GPQASource 88.1%90.5%Kimi K2.6 leads
GPQA-DSource 88.1%90.5%Kimi K2.6 leads
HLESource 34.8%34.7%DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) leads
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 40.3%44.2%Kimi K2.6 leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 89.4%91.1%Kimi K2.6 leads
AA-HLESource 32.1%35.9%Kimi K2.6 leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -22.9%6.4%Kimi K2.6 leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 37.2%32.8%DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 95.8%39.3%Kimi K2.6 leads
AA Openness IndexSource 50.0%—Not comparable
MathDeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) wins
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)Kimi K2.6Result
HMMT Feb 2026Source 94.8%92.7%DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) leads
IMOAnswerBenchSource 88.4%—Not comparable
ApexSource 33.0%—Not comparable
Apex ShortlistSource 85.7%—Not comparable
AIME26Source —96.4%Not comparable
MMAnswerBenchSource —86.0%Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source —38.966%Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source —14.580%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)Kimi K2.6Result
Design Arena WebsiteSource 12381306Kimi K2.6 leads
MMMU-ProSource —79.4%Not comparable
MMMU-Pro w/ PythonSource —80.1%Not comparable
CharXivSource —80.4%Not comparable
MathVisionSource —87.4%Not comparable
V*Source —96.9%Not comparable
AA-MMMU-ProSource —79.4%Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)Kimi K2.6Result
AA-IFBenchSource 79.2%76.0%DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) leads
Frequently Asked Questions (5)

Which is better, DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) or Kimi K2.6?

DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) and Kimi K2.6 are tied on the BenchAlign overall score, so the right pick depends on which category matters most for your use case.

Which is better for knowledge tasks, DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) or Kimi K2.6?

DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 55.3 versus 42.2. Inside this category, AA-Omniscience Hallucination Rate is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for coding, DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) or Kimi K2.6?

DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 68.8 versus 64.4. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for math, DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) or Kimi K2.6?

DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 94.8 versus 67.1. Inside this category, HMMT Feb 2026 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for agentic tasks, DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) or Kimi K2.6?

Kimi K2.6 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 73.5 versus 63.8. Inside this category, MCP Atlas is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Self-host vs API cost

Estimates at 50,000 req/day · 1000 tokens/req average.

DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)
API / mo$315
Self-host / moNot listed
Break-even—
Proprietary model — self-hosting not applicable.
Kimi K2.6
API / mo$3,713
Self-host / mo$18,221
Break-even326M/day
Model the full break-even

Related Comparisons

Explore More

DeepSeek Compare Pricing Methodology Find Your Best LLM Overall Rankings
Last updated: July 23, 2026

Choose a model with this week’s evidence

Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.

One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.