Compare/Kimi K2.6 vs Claude 3.5 Haiku

Kimi K2.6vsClaude 3.5 Haiku

Side-by-side comparison of pricing, 12 benchmarks, and generation speed.

Kimi

Kimi K2.6

Input
$0.95/M
Output
$4/M
Speed
135 tok/s
TTFT
0.78s
Anthropic

Claude 3.5 Haiku

Input
$0.8/M
Output
$4/M
Speed
TTFT

Winner by Category

Cheaper
Claude 3.5 Haiku
Faster (tok/s)
Kimi K2.6
Lower Latency
Claude 3.5 Haiku
Benchmarks (7-3)
Kimi K2.6

Pricing Comparison

MetricKimi K2.6Claude 3.5 Haiku
Input ($/M tokens)$0.95$0.8
Output ($/M tokens)$4$4
Cost for 1M input + 100K output tokens:
Kimi K2.6$1.35
Claude 3.5 Haiku$1.20

Speed Comparison

Output Speed (tokens/s) — higher is better
Kimi K2.6
135 tok/s
Claude 3.5 Haiku
Time to First Token (seconds) — lower is better
Kimi K2.6
0.78s
Claude 3.5 Haiku

Benchmark Comparison

Data from Artificial Analysis API — 12 benchmarks

Intelligence Index
53.918.7
Coding Index
47.110.7
Math Index
GPQA Diamond
91.1%40.8%
MMLU-Pro
63.4%
LiveCodeBench
31.4%
AIME 2025
MATH-500
72.1%
Humanity's Last Exam
35.9%3.5%
SciCode
53.5%27.4%
IFBench
76.0%42.8%
TerminalBench
43.9%2.3%
Kimi K2.67 wins
3 winsClaude 3.5 Haiku

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is cheaper, Kimi K2.6 or Claude 3.5 Haiku?

Claude 3.5 Haiku is cheaper overall. Its blended price (3:1 input/output ratio) is $1.60/M tokens vs $1.71/M for Kimi K2.6.

Which model performs better on benchmarks?

Kimi K2.6 wins 7 out of 12 benchmarks compared to 3 for Claude 3.5 Haiku. See the detailed benchmark chart above for per-category results.

Which is faster for real-time applications?

Kimi K2.6 generates tokens faster at 135 tok/s vs 0 tok/s. However, Claude 3.5 Haiku has lower time-to-first-token (0.00s vs 0.78s).

When should I use Kimi K2.6 vs Claude 3.5 Haiku?

Choose based on your priorities: Claude 3.5 Haiku for lower cost, Kimi K2.6 for stronger benchmark performance, and Kimi K2.6 for faster generation. For latency-sensitive apps, check the TTFT comparison above.