Claude Opus 4.8 vs Kimi K2.6

Price, context and benchmark scores side by side — every number from the live model catalogue.

Claude Opus 4.8anthropic Kimi K2.6moonshotai
Input / 1M tokens $5.00 $0.600
Output / 1M tokens $25.00 $2.72
1M in + 300K out $12.50 $1.42
Context window 1M 262K
Intelligence index 55.7 44.2
Coding index 74.3 61.8
Agentic index 47.2 30.3
Cheapest provider Azure Baidu
Providers serving it 4 21
Weights Closed Open
Image input Yes Yes
Tool calling Yes Yes
Reasoning mode Yes Yes
Released May 27, 2026 Apr 20, 2026

Which one to pick

Pick Claude Opus 4.8 if…

  • You want the higher general-intelligence score (55.7).
  • Code quality is the priority — it leads on the coding index (74.3).
  • You are running agent loops — higher agentic index (47.2).
  • You need the bigger context window (1M).

Pick Kimi K2.6 if…

  • Token cost matters: $2.72 per 1M output vs $25.00.
  • You want the option to self-host — weights are public.
  • You want provider redundancy: 21 providers serve it.

FAQ

Is Claude Opus 4.8 better than Kimi K2.6?

Claude Opus 4.8 scores higher on general intelligence (55.7 vs 44.2), while Kimi K2.6 is 9.2× cheaper per output token ($2.72 vs $25.00). For code, Claude Opus 4.8 leads (74.3 coding index). Claude Opus 4.8 takes the larger context at 1M.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.8 or Kimi K2.6?

Kimi K2.6, at $2.72 per 1M output tokens versus $25.00. On a 1M input + 300K output workload that is $1.42 against $12.50.

Can I self-host Claude Opus 4.8 or Kimi K2.6?

Claude Opus 4.8: closed weights, API only. Kimi K2.6: open weights (moonshotai/Kimi-K2.6).

Related comparisons