Agentic
Like-for-like- Inkling-Small
- 36.9
- Supported · #128/152
- Kimi K2.6
- 46.7
- Supported · #74/152
- Basis
- BenchAlign lane · 5 vs 12 public rows
- Reading
- Kimi K2.6 leads · intervals overlap
Inkling-Small vs Kimi K2.6
Updated September 10, 2026. Public scores include evidence status and uncertainty. They are not guarantees for a specific workload.
Decision reading
Kimi K2.6 has the higher public score estimate, 65.39 versus 59.25, but the 90% score intervals overlap. Treat that as a lead, not a settled winner.
19 results are shared. Category rows resting on Estimated evidence or different benchmark sets are marked directional and do not name a winner.
Share or export
Which one for your work
Recommendations appear only when a shared evidence basis or an explicit operating constraint supports the call. Secondary and unsupported use cases stay disclosed below the initial list.
Coding work
Code generation, repair, and software-engineering tasks
Kimi K2.6
Kimi K2.6 leads on the public coding lane, 50.8 to 43.8, with Supported evidence for both models, although the 90% intervals overlap.
Confidence: limited
Agentic work
Tool use, computer use, and multi-step task completion
Kimi K2.6
Kimi K2.6 leads on the public agentic lane, 46.7 to 36.9, with Supported evidence for both models, although the 90% intervals overlap.
Confidence: limited
Long documents
Prompts that approach the documented context limit
Inkling-Small
Inkling-Small has the larger documented context window.
Confidence: documented
Show secondary and unsupported calls
Chat turn cost
1K fresh input + 500 output tokens
Inkling-Small
Inkling-Small has the lower estimated token cost for this stated workload. Costs use the listed standard API rates.
Confidence: listed-rates
Cache-heavy agent loop cost
200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens
Inkling-Small
Inkling-Small has the lower estimated token cost for this stated workload. Kimi K2.6 has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate.
Confidence: rate-fallback
Repository review cost
50K fresh input + 3K output tokens
Inkling-Small
Inkling-Small has the lower estimated token cost for this stated workload. Costs use the listed standard API rates.
Confidence: listed-rates
What is actually comparable
Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results present for only one model describe coverage, not superiority.
6 Inkling-Small only
19 Shared
18 Kimi K2.6 only
- Shared results
- 19
- Inkling-Small only
- 6
- Kimi K2.6 only
- 18
- Like-for-like categories
- 4 / 8
Category results, on a stated basis
Each row shows the public-lane category score for both models: the BenchAlign lane for agentic, coding, and knowledge, and the weighted public rows elsewhere, with the same rank each model page reports. A row is like-for-like only when both scores rest on Supported evidence or the same weighted set. Directional and not-comparable rows remain visible, but they never receive a winner.
Coding
Like-for-like- Inkling-Small
- 43.8
- Supported · #97/151
- Kimi K2.6
- 50.8
- Supported · #52/151
- Basis
- BenchAlign lane · 6 vs 10 public rows
- Reading
- Kimi K2.6 leads · intervals overlap
Knowledge
Like-for-like- Inkling-Small
- 56.5
- Supported · #46/183
- Kimi K2.6
- 61.5
- Supported · #32/183
- Basis
- BenchAlign lane · 6 vs 5 public rows
- Reading
- Kimi K2.6 leads · intervals overlap
Multimodal
Like-for-like- Inkling-Small
- 48.8
- #39/48
- Kimi K2.6
- 64.0
- #26/48
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 2 vs 2 weighted rows
- Reading
- Kimi K2.6 leads
Reasoning
Not comparable- Inkling-Small
- 42.7
- Unranked · 3 rankable rows
- Kimi K2.6
- Not ranked
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 1 vs 0 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Math
Not comparable- Inkling-Small
- 76.9
- Unranked · 2 rankable rows
- Kimi K2.6
- 71.3
- #1/7
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 2 vs 4 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Multilingual
Not comparable- Inkling-Small
- Not ranked
- Kimi K2.6
- Not ranked
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Instruction following
Not comparable- Inkling-Small
- 89.6
- #25/123
- Kimi K2.6
- Not ranked
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 1 vs 0 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
| Category | Inkling-Small | Kimi K2.6 | Basis | Reading |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agentic | 36.9Supported · #128/152 | 46.7Supported · #74/152 | Like-for-likeBenchAlign lane · 5 vs 12 public rows | Kimi K2.6 leads · intervals overlap |
| Coding | 43.8Supported · #97/151 | 50.8Supported · #52/151 | Like-for-likeBenchAlign lane · 6 vs 10 public rows | Kimi K2.6 leads · intervals overlap |
| Knowledge | 56.5Supported · #46/183 | 61.5Supported · #32/183 | Like-for-likeBenchAlign lane · 6 vs 5 public rows | Kimi K2.6 leads · intervals overlap |
| Multimodal | 48.8#39/48 | 64.0#26/48 | Like-for-likeProvisional lane · 2 vs 2 weighted rows | Kimi K2.6 leads |
| Reasoning | 42.7Unranked · 3 rankable rows | Not ranked | Not comparableProvisional lane · 1 vs 0 weighted rows | Not comparable |
| Math | 76.9Unranked · 2 rankable rows | 71.3#1/7 | Not comparableProvisional lane · 2 vs 4 weighted rows | Not comparable |
| Multilingual | Not ranked | Not ranked | Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows | Not comparable |
| Instruction following | 89.6#25/123 | Not ranked | Not comparableProvisional lane · 1 vs 0 weighted rows | Not comparable |
Ranks count the models scored in each category’s lane, so the agentic, coding, and knowledge denominators (BenchAlign) differ from the provisional-lane categories. Unranked scores sit on the lane’s scale but never name a winner. Like-for-like rows within 0.5 points read as a practical tie.
Shape of the matched evidence
Only shared public evidence is shown. Sparse evidence stays a ruled list rather than being closed into a radar shape.
Too few matched category axes support a radar. The ruled list below shows only shared benchmark results; positions use each benchmark’s normalized display scale when available.
HLE
Knowledge
BrowseComp
Agentic
MMMU-Pro
Multimodal
SciCode
Coding
SWE-bench Pro
Coding
What each workload costs
Three fixed token mixes turn per-token rates into comparable decisions. Each scenario states context fit and whether cached input had to fall back to the published list-input rate.
Chat turn
1K fresh input + 500 output tokens
- Inkling-Small
- $0.0013
- Fits in one request
- Kimi K2.6
- $0.00295
- Fits in one request
Inkling-Small has the lower modeled cost
Costs use the listed standard API rates.
Repository review
50K fresh input + 3K output tokens
- Inkling-Small
- $0.03332
- Fits in one request
- Kimi K2.6
- $0.0595
- Fits in one request
Inkling-Small has the lower modeled cost
Costs use the listed standard API rates.
Cache-heavy agent loop
200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens
- Inkling-Small
- $0.0492
- Fits in one request
- Kimi K2.6
- $0.249
- Fits in one request
- Cached input priced at the published list-input rate
Inkling-Small has the lower modeled cost
Kimi K2.6 has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate.
Specification differences
Sourced differences are shown directly. Missing facts stay explicit instead of being inferred from a model name or family.
SpecificationInkling-SmallKimi K2.6
Context window
Maximum documented context; output-token limits may be lower.
Inkling-Small
1M
Kimi K2.6
256K
API model ID
Inkling-Small
Not sourced
Kimi K2.6
Not sourced
Cached-input rate
A missing cached-input rate falls back to the listed input rate only in the stated workload estimate.
Inkling-Small
$0.116 per 1M cached input tokens
Kimi K2.6
Not published
Documented inputs
Inkling-Small
Not sourced
Kimi K2.6
Not sourced
Documented outputs
Inkling-Small
Not sourced
Kimi K2.6
Not sourced
Provider availability
Inkling-Small
Not sourced
Kimi K2.6
Not sourced
Reasoning profile
Inkling-Small
Hybrid
Kimi K2.6
Reasoning
Weight access
Inkling-Small
Open Weight
Kimi K2.6
Open Weight
License
Inkling-Small
Open Weight
Kimi K2.6
Open Weight
Release date
Inkling-Small
2026-07-30
Kimi K2.6
2026-04-20
If you already use one of these models
- Deployment change
- The models list different providers, so authentication, endpoint behavior, limits, and feature support may change.
- Quality signal
- Kimi K2.6 has the higher public score estimate, 65.39 versus 59.25, but the 90% score intervals overlap.
- Workload cost
- Repository review: $0.03332 vs $0.0595. Cache-heavy agent loop: $0.0492 vs $0.249.
- Context tradeoff
- Inkling-Small has the larger documented window (1M).
Run the same representative tasks against both endpoints before changing production traffic.
Self-host vs API cost
Estimates at 50,000 req/day · 1000 tokens/req average.
Inkling-Small
API / mo$1,515
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
Benchmark evidence
The full public result ledger is available for audit without forcing a wide desktop table onto a phone.
Browse raw public benchmark evidence43 rows
Agentic
Terminal-Bench 2.0
Inkling-Small64.7%SourceKimi K2.666.7%SourceKimi K2.6 leads this result
BrowseComp
Inkling-Small77.4%SourceKimi K2.683.2%SourceKimi K2.6 leads this result
MCP Atlas
Inkling-Small79.6%SourceKimi K2.655.9%SourceInkling-Small leads this result
Toolathlon-Verified
Inkling-Small54.4%SourceKimi K2.6—Not directly comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals)
Inkling-Small55.1%SourceKimi K2.653.6%SourceInkling-Small leads this result
OSWorld-Verified
Inkling-Small—Kimi K2.673.1%SourceNot directly comparable
Toolathlon
Inkling-Small—Kimi K2.650%SourceNot directly comparable
Claw-Eval
Inkling-Small—Kimi K2.662.3%SourceNot directly comparable
DeepSearchQA
Inkling-Small—Kimi K2.692.5%SourceNot directly comparable
WideResearch
Inkling-Small—Kimi K2.680.8%SourceNot directly comparable
Gert Labs
Inkling-Small—Kimi K2.656.82%SourceNot directly comparable
ResearchClawBench
Inkling-Small—Kimi K2.618.0%SourceNot directly comparable
OSWorld 2.0
Inkling-Small—Kimi K2.64.6%SourceNot directly comparable
Coding
SWE-bench Verified
Inkling-Small80.2%SourceKimi K2.680.2%SourceTie
SWE-bench Pro
Inkling-Small55.9%SourceKimi K2.658.6%SourceKimi K2.6 leads this result
Terminal-Bench 2.0
Inkling-Small64.7%SourceKimi K2.666.7%SourceKimi K2.6 leads this result
SciCode
Inkling-Small48.7%SourceKimi K2.652.2%SourceKimi K2.6 leads this result
LiveCodeBench (Vals)
Inkling-Small85.9%SourceKimi K2.686.8%SourceKimi K2.6 leads this result
SWE-bench (Vals)
Inkling-Small82.2%SourceKimi K2.676.2%SourceInkling-Small leads this result
LiveCodeBench v6
Inkling-Small—Kimi K2.689.6%SourceNot directly comparable
SWE Multilingual
Inkling-Small—Kimi K2.676.7%SourceNot directly comparable
Vibe Code Bench
Inkling-Small—Kimi K2.637.89%SourceNot directly comparable
cursorBench31
Inkling-Small—Kimi K2.647.6%SourceNot directly comparable
Reasoning
Knowledge
GPQA
Inkling-Small89.5%SourceKimi K2.690.5%SourceKimi K2.6 leads this result
GPQA-D
Inkling-Small89.5%SourceKimi K2.690.5%SourceKimi K2.6 leads this result
HLE
Inkling-Small47.8%SourceKimi K2.634.7%SourceInkling-Small leads this result
HLE w/o tools
Inkling-Small31.6%SourceKimi K2.6—Not directly comparable
GPQA Diamond (Vals)
Inkling-Small83.6%SourceKimi K2.689.1%SourceKimi K2.6 leads this result
MMLU-Pro (Vals)
Inkling-Small85.6%SourceKimi K2.687.6%SourceKimi K2.6 leads this result
Math
AIME26
Inkling-Small95.5%SourceKimi K2.696.4%SourceKimi K2.6 leads this result
HMMT Feb 2026
Inkling-Small90.2%SourceKimi K2.692.7%SourceKimi K2.6 leads this result
MMAnswerBench
Inkling-Small—Kimi K2.686.0%SourceNot directly comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)
Inkling-Small—Kimi K2.638.966%SourceNot directly comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)
Inkling-Small—Kimi K2.614.580%SourceNot directly comparable
Multimodal
MMMU-Pro
Inkling-Small74%SourceKimi K2.679.4%SourceKimi K2.6 leads this result
CharXiv
Inkling-Small81.3%SourceKimi K2.680.4%SourceInkling-Small leads this result
CharXiv w/o tools
Inkling-Small77.4%SourceKimi K2.6—Not directly comparable
MMMU-Pro w/ Python
Inkling-Small—Kimi K2.680.1%SourceNot directly comparable
MathVision
Inkling-Small—Kimi K2.687.4%SourceNot directly comparable
V*
Inkling-Small—Kimi K2.696.9%SourceNot directly comparable
Instruction following
IFBench
Inkling-Small82.2%SourceKimi K2.6—Not directly comparable
Frequently asked questions
Which is better, Inkling-Small or Kimi K2.6?
Kimi K2.6 has the higher public score estimate, 65.39 versus 59.25, but the 90% score intervals overlap. The higher estimate is not a decisive winner because the uncertainty ranges overlap.
Which is better for coding, Inkling-Small or Kimi K2.6?
Kimi K2.6 leads the public coding lane, 50.8 to 43.8, with Supported evidence for both models, although the 90% intervals overlap.
Which is better for agentic tasks, Inkling-Small or Kimi K2.6?
Kimi K2.6 leads the public agentic tasks lane, 46.7 to 36.9, with Supported evidence for both models, although the 90% intervals overlap.
Which costs less, Inkling-Small or Kimi K2.6?
For the stated presets, chat costs $0.0013 on Inkling-Small and $0.00295 on Kimi K2.6; repository review costs $0.03332 and $0.0595; the cache-heavy agent loop costs $0.0492 and $0.249. Kimi K2.6 has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate.
Which has the larger context window, Inkling-Small or Kimi K2.6?
Inkling-Small has the larger documented context window: 1M, compared with 256K.
Related comparisons
Last updated September 10, 2026
Watch Inkling-Small vs Kimi K2.6
One weekly email when material rank, price, or benchmark evidence changes make this matchup worth revisiting.
Read a sample issueJoin 2,000+ readers.