ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Grok 4.6 vs Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed vs Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B

Too close to call on our weighted score (Grok 4.6 44, Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed 44, Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B 34). The right pick depends on what you value most.

  1. xAI

    Grok 4.6

    Released Aug 12, 2026

    44/100
    • ECI156.6
    • Price$2.00 / $6.00
    • Context500K
  2. Moonshot AI

    Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed

    Released Jun 12, 2026

    44/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$1.90 / $8.00
    • Context262K
  3. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B

    Released Aug 12, 2026

    34/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$2.00 / $6.00
    • Context262K
01 — Verdict

Too close to call

It is close. Our weighted score puts them within a point (Grok 4.6 44/100, Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed 44/100, Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B 34/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Grok 4.6 on price and Grok 4.6 for long inputs. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.

  • CapabilityNot enough dataNo independent benchmark covers every model here yet
  • Lowest priceGrok 4.6 and Qwen3.8 2.4T A95BGrok 4.6 $3.00 · Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B $3.00 · Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed $3.42 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextGrok 4.6Grok 4.6 500,000 · Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed 262,144 · Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B 262,144 tokens
  • Widest inputsKimi K2.7 Code HighspeedGrok 4.6: Text, Images · Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed: Text, Images, Video · Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B: Text
  • Self-hostingKimi K2.7 Code Highspeed and Qwen3.8 2.4T A95BPublishes downloadable weights (qwen3.8-max)
How the score is built
MeasureWeightGrok 4.6Kimi K2.7 Code HighspeedQwen3.8 2.4T A95B
Price50%272527
Inputs & features30%708045
Context window20%483737
Overall100%44/10044/10034/100

Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.

02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

Grok 4.6 vs Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed vs Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B specifications side by side
SpecificationGrok 4.6xAIKimi K2.7 Code HighspeedMoonshot AIQwen3.8 2.4T A95BAlibaba (Qwen)
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)156.6——
ECI rank#19 of 148——
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions94.0%——
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics66.0%——
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics99.2%——
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions49.3%——
Price per million tokens
Input$2.00$1.90 (best)$2.00
Output$6.00 (best)$8.00$6.00 (best)
Cached input$0.50——
Blended (3:1)$3.00 (best)$3.42$3.00 (best)
Long-context rateOver 200K: $4.00 / $12.00Same rateSame rate
Price sourceOfficial xAI APIMedian of 11 providersMedian of 21 providers
Limits
Context window500,000 tokens (best)262,144 tokens262,144 tokens
Max output500,000 tokens (best)262,144 tokens131,072 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesYesYesNo
PDFsNoNoNo
AudioNoNoNo
VideoNoYesNo
ReasoningYeslow · medium · high · xhighYesYes
Tool callingYesYesYes
Structured outputYesYesYes
Availability
WeightsProprietaryOpenOpenqwen3.8-max
API model IDgrok-4.6——
API providers29 (best)1121
ReleasedAug 12, 2026Jun 12, 2026Aug 12, 2026
Knowledge cutoffFeb 1, 2026Jan 2025—
03 — Cost

What would a month cost?

Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.

  • Grok 4.6$32.00
  • Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed$35.00
  • Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B$32.00
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Grok 4.6, Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed or Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B?

It is close. Our weighted score puts them within a point (Grok 4.6 44/100, Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed 44/100, Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B 34/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Grok 4.6 on price and Grok 4.6 for long inputs. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.

Which is cheaper, Grok 4.6, Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed or Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B?

Grok 4.6 is cheaper at $2.00 input / $6.00 output per million tokens (official xAI API price). Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B costs $2.00 input / $6.00 output per million tokens (median across 21 API providers); Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed costs $1.90 input / $8.00 output per million tokens (median across 11 API providers). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $3.00 per million tokens for Grok 4.6 versus $3.00 for Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B (1× as much) and $3.42 for Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed (1.1× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Grok 4.6 has an ECI of 156.6, Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed has not been scored yet and Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B has not been scored yet.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Grok 4.6, Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed and Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. All three support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Grok 4.6 has the largest context window at 500,000 tokens, against 262,144 for Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed and 262,144 for Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B. Maximum output per response: Grok 4.6 up to 500,000, Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed up to 262,144, Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B up to 131,072 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Grok 4.6 accepts text and images; Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed accepts text, images and video; Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B accepts text. Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed and Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B publishes its weights (qwen3.8-max) and can be self-hosted; Grok 4.6 is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Grok 4.6 is the newest, released Aug 12, 2026. Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B came out Aug 12, 2026; Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed came out Jun 12, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: Grok 4.6 Feb 1, 2026, Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed Jan 2025.

How do you decide the winner?

Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Oct 4, 2026.