Head-to-head comparison across 1benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
Holo3-35B-A3B
100
Kimi K2.6
85
Verified leaderboard positions: Holo3-35B-A3B unranked · Kimi K2.6 #9
Pick Holo3-35B-A3B if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Kimi K2.6 only becomes the better choice if you need the larger 256K context window or you want the stronger reasoning-first profile.
Agentic
+9.5 difference
Holo3-35B-A3B
Kimi K2.6
$null / $null
$0.95 / $4
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
64K
256K
Pick Holo3-35B-A3B if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Kimi K2.6 only becomes the better choice if you need the larger 256K context window or you want the stronger reasoning-first profile.
Holo3-35B-A3B is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 100 to 85. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Holo3-35B-A3B's sharpest advantage is in agentic, where it averages 82.6 against 73.1. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is OSWorld-Verified, 82.6% to 73.1%.
Kimi K2.6 is the reasoning model in the pair, while Holo3-35B-A3B is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. Kimi K2.6 gives you the larger context window at 256K, compared with 64K for Holo3-35B-A3B.
Holo3-35B-A3B is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 100 to 85. The biggest single separator in this matchup is OSWorld-Verified, where the scores are 82.6% and 73.1%.
Holo3-35B-A3B has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 82.6 versus 73.1. Inside this category, OSWorld-Verified is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Estimates at 50,000 req/day · 1000 tokens/req average.
For engineers, researchers, and the plain curious — a weekly brief on new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.