Compare

Claude Opus 4.8 vs Kimi-K2.6

Pricing per million tokens, context window, capabilities — pulled from each provider's public docs. All 2 are available via the same AIgateway OpenAI-compatible endpoint; flip the model string to switch.

Search2/4
Claude Opus 4.8
anthropic/claude-opus-4.8
Kimi-K2.6
moonshot/kimi-k2.6
Provider
Anthropic
Moonshot
Family
Claude 4
Kimi
Modality
text
text
Context window
1,000,000 tok
262,144 tok
Max output
128,000 tok
16,384 tok
Released
2026-05-28
2026-04-20
License
Proprietary
Open-weight
Input price
$5.00 /1M
$0.950 /1M
Output price
$25.00 /1M
$4.00 /1M
Cache read
$0.500 /1M
$0.160 /1M
Cache write
$6.25 /1M
Tools
yes
yes
Streaming
yes
yes
Vision
yes
yes
JSON mode
yes
yes
Reasoning
yes
yes
Prompt caching
yes
yes
Batch API
yes
Try it
Open in playground →
Open in playground →
Claude Opus 4.8
anthropic/claude-opus-4.8
Full spec →

Claude Opus 4.8 is Anthropic's most capable generally available model, with a step-change improvement in agentic coding over Claude Opus 4.7. It uses adaptive thinking to calibrate reasoning per task and supports a one million token context window at standard pricing.

Strengths
  • Anthropic's most capable model — #1 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index
  • Best computer-use / browser agent tested (84% on Online-Mind2Web)
  • Adaptive thinking — calibrates reasoning depth per task
Use cases
Autonomous coding agentsCodebase-scale migrationsComputer use / browser agentsHigh-stakes reasoning + analysisLong-document work (1M context)
Kimi-K2.6
moonshot/kimi-k2.6
Full spec →

Kimi K2.6 is a frontier-scale open-source 1T parameter model with a 262.1k context window, multi-turn tool calling, vision inputs, and structured outputs for agentic workloads.

Strengths
  • Frontier-scale 1T parameters, open-weight
  • ~10× cheaper than Opus
  • Multi-turn tool calling + vision
Use cases
Code agentsLong-document reasoningCost-conscious production

Benchmarks

Claude Opus 4.8
Kimi-K2.6
AA Intelligence Index
61.0
HumanEval
92.7
Online-Mind2Web (computer use)
84.0
SWE-Bench
68.2

Source: each provider's published benchmarks. Higher is better. Run an eval to compare on your own data.

Compare with another

Kimi-K2.6 vs Claude Opus 4.7
moonshot/kimi-k2.6 · anthropic/claude-opus-4.7
GPT-5.4 vs Kimi-K2.6
openai/gpt-5.4 · moonshot/kimi-k2.6
Gemini 3.1 Pro vs Kimi-K2.6
google/gemini-3.1-pro · moonshot/kimi-k2.6
Kimi-K2.6 vs Kimi-K2.5
moonshot/kimi-k2.6 · moonshot/kimi-k2.5
Kimi-K2.6 vs Llama-4-Scout-17b-16e-Instruct
moonshot/kimi-k2.6 · meta/llama-4-scout-17b-16e-instruct
Claude Opus 4.8 vs Claude Sonnet 4.6
anthropic/claude-opus-4.8 · anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.6
Claude Opus 4.8 vs Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent
anthropic/claude-opus-4.8 · xai/grok-4.20-multi-agent-0309
Claude Opus 4.8 vs GPT-5.4
anthropic/claude-opus-4.8 · openai/gpt-5.4
Claude Opus 4.8 vs Gemini 2.5 Pro
anthropic/claude-opus-4.8 · google/gemini-2.5-pro
SWITCH BETWEEN THEM

One key, all 2, one line different.

from openai import OpenAI

client = OpenAI(
    base_url="https://api.aigateway.sh/v1",
    api_key="sk-aig-...",
)

# Claude Opus 4.8
client.chat.completions.create(
    model="anthropic/claude-opus-4.8",
    messages=[{"role":"user","content":"hello"}],
)

# Kimi-K2.6
client.chat.completions.create(
    model="moonshot/kimi-k2.6",
    messages=[{"role":"user","content":"hello"}],
)
Get an AIgateway keyRun an eval on these →