Long documents
Prompts that approach the documented context limit
Kimi K2.6
Kimi K2.6 has the larger documented context window.
Confidence: documented
Kimi K2.6 vs MiniMax M1 80k
Updated October 17, 2026. Rank says Kimi K2.6 is ahead. Price, access, and your workload can each overturn that. Public scores include evidence status and uncertainty.
Share or export
Decision reading
Kimi K2.6 has the higher public point estimate, 58.4 versus 27.58. Their conditional score ranges do not overlap. These ranges do not establish rank confidence. 1 results are shared. Category rows resting on Estimated evidence or different benchmark sets are marked directional and do not name a winner.
- Shared results
- 1
- Kimi K2.6 only
- 36
- MiniMax M1 80k only
- 5
- Like-for-like categories
- 0 / 8
Estimated: Kimi K2.6 and MiniMax M1 80k. Conditional ranges do not establish rank confidence.How the comparison works
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.
Show secondary and unsupported calls
Coding work
Code generation, repair, and software-engineering tasks
Not enough matched evidence
MiniMax M1 80k is not ranked on the public lane for coding, so no winner is named for coding.
Confidence: limitedAgentic work
Tool use, computer use, and multi-step task completion
Not enough matched evidence
MiniMax M1 80k is not ranked on the public lane for agentic, so no winner is named for agentic.
Confidence: limitedChat turn cost
1K fresh input + 500 output tokens
Not enough matched evidence
A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Confidence: listed-ratesCache-heavy agent loop cost
200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens
Not enough matched evidence
The page does not recommend a cost winner because at least one model cannot fit the stated workload in one request. MiniMax M1 80k does not fit this workload in one request. MiniMax M1 80k has no comparable published API token rate.
Confidence: listed-ratesRepository review cost
50K fresh input + 3K output tokens
Not enough matched evidence
A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Confidence: listed-rates
Which one for a specific job
Choose a job from the LLM Selector's task catalog to see the category row it rests on, under the same basis rules as the table below. A directional row stays directional; choosing a job never creates a winner.
The same task catalog as the LLM Selector. Each job names the evidence surface it rests on; nothing here adds a new score.
43.1Kimi K2.6—MiniMax M1 80k
Not comparable · BenchAlign v5.8
The coding row is not comparable on the public lane: at least one model is not measured or not ranked there.
Coding scores combine specific tasks and setups. Match the editor, harness, and effort to your workflow.
Same basis rules as the category table below
What is actually comparable
Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results present for only one model describe coverage, not superiority.
36 Kimi K2.6 only
1 Shared
5 MiniMax M1 80k only
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.
SWE-bench VerifiedCoding
Normalized gap 24.2Kimi K2.6:80.2%MiniMax M1 80k:56%
Bars run 0–100 on each benchmark’s normalized display scale
Category results, on a stated basis
Each row shows the public-lane category score for both models: the BenchAlign v5.8 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.
Agentic
Not comparable- Kimi K2.6
- 44.3
- Supported · #59/128
- MiniMax M1 80k
- Not ranked
- Basis
- BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 12 vs 0 public rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Coding
Not comparable- Kimi K2.6
- 43.1
- Supported · #58/150
- MiniMax M1 80k
- Not ranked
- Basis
- BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 10 vs 2 public rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Reasoning
Not comparable- Kimi K2.6
- Not ranked
- MiniMax M1 80k
- 68.9
- Unranked · 1 rankable row
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Multimodal
Not comparable- Kimi K2.6
- 73.8
- #27/54
- MiniMax M1 80k
- Not ranked
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 2 vs 0 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Knowledge
Not comparable- Kimi K2.6
- 60.3
- Supported · #49/184
- MiniMax M1 80k
- Not ranked
- Basis
- BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 5 vs 0 public rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Multilingual
Not comparable- Kimi K2.6
- Not ranked
- MiniMax M1 80k
- Not ranked
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Instruction following
Not comparable- Kimi K2.6
- Not ranked
- MiniMax M1 80k
- Not ranked
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Math
Not comparable- Kimi K2.6
- 76.8
- #4/12
- MiniMax M1 80k
- Not ranked
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 4 vs 0 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
| Category | Kimi K2.6 | MiniMax M1 80k | Basis | Reading |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agentic | 44.3Supported · #59/128 | Not ranked | Not comparableBenchAlign v5.8 lane · 12 vs 0 public rows | Not comparable |
| Coding | 43.1Supported · #58/150 | Not ranked | Not comparableBenchAlign v5.8 lane · 10 vs 2 public rows | Not comparable |
| Reasoning | Not ranked | 68.9Unranked · 1 rankable row | Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows | Not comparable |
| Multimodal | 73.8#27/54 | Not ranked | Not comparableProvisional lane · 2 vs 0 weighted rows | Not comparable |
| Knowledge | 60.3Supported · #49/184 | Not ranked | Not comparableBenchAlign v5.8 lane · 5 vs 0 public rows | Not comparable |
| Multilingual | Not ranked | Not ranked | Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows | Not comparable |
| Instruction following | Not ranked | Not ranked | Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows | Not comparable |
| Math | 76.8#4/12 | Not ranked | Not comparableProvisional lane · 4 vs 0 weighted rows | Not comparable |
Ranks count the models scored in each category’s lane, so the agentic, coding, and knowledge denominators (BenchAlign v5.8) differ from the provisional-lane categories. Unranked scores sit on the provisional lane’s scale but never name a winner. Like-for-like rows within 0.5 points read as a practical tie.
Supported evidence per lane · bars run 0–100Methodology
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
- Kimi K2.6
- $0.00295
- Fits in one request
- MiniMax M1 80k
- API rate not published
- Fits in one request
MiniMax M1 80k has no comparable published API token rate.
Repository review
50K fresh input + 3K output tokens
- Kimi K2.6
- $0.0595
- Fits in one request
- MiniMax M1 80k
- API rate not published
- Fits in one request
MiniMax M1 80k has no comparable published API token rate.
Cache-heavy agent loop
200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens
- Kimi K2.6
- $0.091
- Fits in one request
- MiniMax M1 80k
- API rate not published
- Does not fit in one request
- Cached-input rate unavailable
MiniMax M1 80k does not fit this workload in one request. MiniMax M1 80k has no comparable published API token rate.
Cached input falls back to the list input rate only where a cached rate is unpublished
Specification differences
Sourced differences are shown directly. Missing facts stay explicit instead of being inferred from a model name or family.
SpecificationKimi K2.6MiniMax M1 80k
Context window
Maximum documented context; output-token limits may be lower.
Kimi K2.6
256K
MiniMax M1 80k
80K
API model ID
Kimi K2.6
Not sourced
MiniMax M1 80k
Not sourced
Cached-input rate
A missing cached-input rate falls back to the listed input rate only in the stated workload estimate.
Kimi K2.6
$0.16 per 1M cached input tokens
MiniMax M1 80k
No comparable hosted API rate
Documented inputs
Kimi K2.6
Not sourced
MiniMax M1 80k
Not sourced
Documented outputs
Kimi K2.6
Not sourced
MiniMax M1 80k
Not sourced
Provider availability
Kimi K2.6
Not sourced
MiniMax M1 80k
Not sourced
Reasoning profile
Kimi K2.6
Reasoning
MiniMax M1 80k
Non-Reasoning
Weight access
Kimi K2.6
Open Weight
MiniMax M1 80k
Proprietary
License
Kimi K2.6
Open Weight
MiniMax M1 80k
Proprietary
Release date
Kimi K2.6
2026-04-20
MiniMax M1 80k
2025-06-16
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 point estimate, 58.4 versus 27.58. Their conditional score ranges do not overlap. These ranges do not establish rank confidence.
- Workload cost
- A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
- Context tradeoff
- Kimi K2.6 has the larger documented window (256K).
Run the same representative tasks against both endpoints before changing production traffic.
Questions
Which is better, Kimi K2.6 or MiniMax M1 80k?
Kimi K2.6 has the higher public point estimate, 58.4 versus 27.58. Their conditional score ranges do not overlap. These ranges do not establish rank confidence. The page therefore keeps the decision tied to the specific documented workload.
Which is better for coding, Kimi K2.6 or MiniMax M1 80k?
MiniMax M1 80k is not ranked on the public lane for coding, so no winner is named for coding.
Which is better for agentic tasks, Kimi K2.6 or MiniMax M1 80k?
MiniMax M1 80k is not ranked on the public lane for agentic tasks, so no winner is named for agentic tasks.
Which costs less, Kimi K2.6 or MiniMax M1 80k?
Both models do not have comparable published API token rates, so this page does not name a universal price winner.
Which has the larger context window, Kimi K2.6 or MiniMax M1 80k?
Kimi K2.6 has the larger documented context window: 256K, compared with 80K.
Self-host vs API cost
Estimates at 50,000 req/day · 1000 tokens/req average.
Kimi K2.6
API / mo$3,713
Self-host / mo$27,962
Break-even500M/day
MiniMax M1 80k
API / mo$0
Self-host / moNot listed
Break-even—
Proprietary model — self-hosting not applicable.
Benchmark evidence
The full public result ledger is available for audit without forcing a wide desktop table onto a phone.
Browse raw public benchmark evidence42 rows
Agentic
Terminal-Bench 2.0
Kimi K2.666.7%SourceMiniMax M1 80k—Not directly comparable
BrowseComp
Kimi K2.683.2%SourceMiniMax M1 80k—Not directly comparable
OSWorld-Verified
Kimi K2.673.1%SourceMiniMax M1 80k—Not directly comparable
Toolathlon
Kimi K2.650%SourceMiniMax M1 80k—Not directly comparable
MCP Atlas
Kimi K2.655.9%SourceMiniMax M1 80k—Not directly comparable
Claw-Eval
Kimi K2.662.3%SourceMiniMax M1 80k—Not directly comparable
DeepSearchQA
Kimi K2.692.5%SourceMiniMax M1 80k—Not directly comparable
WideResearch
Kimi K2.680.8%SourceMiniMax M1 80k—Not directly comparable
Gert Labs
Kimi K2.656.82%SourceMiniMax M1 80k—Not directly comparable
ResearchClawBench
Kimi K2.618.0%SourceMiniMax M1 80k—Not directly comparable
OSWorld 2.0
Kimi K2.64.6%SourceMiniMax M1 80k—Not directly comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals)
Kimi K2.653.6%SourceMiniMax M1 80k—Not directly comparable
Coding
SWE-bench Verified
Kimi K2.680.2%SourceMiniMax M1 80k56%SourceKimi K2.6 leads this result
LiveCodeBench v6
Kimi K2.689.6%SourceMiniMax M1 80k—Not directly comparable
SWE-bench Pro
Kimi K2.658.6%SourceMiniMax M1 80k—Not directly comparable
SWE Multilingual
Kimi K2.676.7%SourceMiniMax M1 80k—Not directly comparable
SciCode
Kimi K2.652.2%SourceMiniMax M1 80k—Not directly comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0
Kimi K2.666.7%SourceMiniMax M1 80k—Not directly comparable
Vibe Code Bench
Kimi K2.637.89%SourceMiniMax M1 80k—Not directly comparable
cursorBench31
Kimi K2.647.6%SourceMiniMax M1 80k—Not directly comparable
LiveCodeBench (Vals)
Kimi K2.686.8%SourceMiniMax M1 80k—Not directly comparable
SWE-bench (Vals)
Kimi K2.676.2%SourceMiniMax M1 80k—Not directly comparable
LiveCodeBench
Kimi K2.6—MiniMax M1 80k65%SourceNot directly comparable
Reasoning
LongBench v2
Kimi K2.6—MiniMax M1 80k61.5%SourceNot directly comparable
Multimodal
MMMU-Pro
Kimi K2.679.4%SourceMiniMax M1 80k—Not directly comparable
MMMU-Pro w/ Python
Kimi K2.680.1%SourceMiniMax M1 80k—Not directly comparable
CharXiv
Kimi K2.680.4%SourceMiniMax M1 80k—Not directly comparable
MathVision
Kimi K2.687.4%SourceMiniMax M1 80k—Not directly comparable
V*
Kimi K2.696.9%SourceMiniMax M1 80k—Not directly comparable
Knowledge
GPQA
Kimi K2.690.5%SourceMiniMax M1 80k—Not directly comparable
GPQA-D
Kimi K2.690.5%SourceMiniMax M1 80k—Not directly comparable
HLE
Kimi K2.634.7%SourceMiniMax M1 80k—Not directly comparable
GPQA Diamond (Vals)
Kimi K2.689.1%SourceMiniMax M1 80k—Not directly comparable
MMLU-Pro (Vals)
Kimi K2.687.6%SourceMiniMax M1 80k—Not directly comparable
Math
AIME26
Kimi K2.696.4%SourceMiniMax M1 80k—Not directly comparable
HMMT Feb 2026
Kimi K2.692.7%SourceMiniMax M1 80k—Not directly comparable
MMAnswerBench
Kimi K2.686.0%SourceMiniMax M1 80k—Not directly comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)
Kimi K2.657.193%SourceMiniMax M1 80k—Not directly comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)
Kimi K2.625.641%SourceMiniMax M1 80k—Not directly comparable
AIME 2024
Kimi K2.6—MiniMax M1 80k86%SourceNot directly comparable
AIME 2025
Kimi K2.6—MiniMax M1 80k76.9%SourceNot directly comparable
MATH-500
Kimi K2.6—MiniMax M1 80k96.8%SourceNot directly comparable
42 public results · 1 shared
Watch Kimi K2.6 vs MiniMax M1 80k
One weekly email when material rank, price, or benchmark evidence changes make this matchup worth revisiting.
Read a sample issueJoin 5,600+ readers.
Last updated October 17, 2026