Claude Opus 4.8
VS
Kimi K2.6
Claude Opus 4.8 vs Kimi K2.6: which wins at real work?
22 task areas · same graded test runs · rank comparison only, so 0–100 and Elo collections never mix raw scores.
Claude Opus 4.8 wins 12 of 22 task areas we tested; Kimi K2.6 takes 10. Kimi K2.6 costs 7.4× less per token ($4.07 vs $30 per 1M).
Kimi K2.6 costs 7.4× less per token ($4.07 vs $30 per 1M).
Task by task
| Task area | Claude Opus 4.8 | Kimi K2.6 | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Product & Project Management |
#2
/ 110
Excellent
|
#53
/ 110
Strong
|
Claude Opus 4.8 |
| Structured Output |
#61
/ 113
Excellent
|
#14
/ 113
Excellent
|
Kimi K2.6 |
| Training & Education |
#2
/ 110
Excellent
|
#45
/ 110
Excellent
|
Claude Opus 4.8 |
| Summarization & Meeting Notes |
#35
/ 110
Excellent
|
#3
/ 110
Excellent
|
Kimi K2.6 |
| Presentations & Decks |
#32
/ 110
Excellent
|
#2
/ 110
Excellent
|
Kimi K2.6 |
| Investor & Pitch |
#27
/ 66
Strong
|
#1
/ 66
Strong
|
Kimi K2.6 |
| Data & Analytics |
#2
/ 110
Excellent
|
#23
/ 110
Excellent
|
Claude Opus 4.8 |
| Knowledge & Docs |
#2
/ 110
Excellent
|
#22
/ 110
Strong
|
Claude Opus 4.8 |
| Legal & HR |
#5
/ 110
Excellent
|
#22
/ 110
Excellent
|
Claude Opus 4.8 |
| AI Strategy |
#4
/ 126
Strong
|
#19
/ 126
Strong
|
Claude Opus 4.8 |
| Content & Brand |
#8
/ 124
Strong
|
#22
/ 124
Strong
|
Claude Opus 4.8 |
| Research & Competitive Analysis |
#5
/ 110
Excellent
|
#19
/ 110
Excellent
|
Claude Opus 4.8 |
| Sales |
#1
/ 110
Strong
|
#15
/ 110
Strong
|
Claude Opus 4.8 |
| Frontend & Landing Pages |
#21
/ 109
Needs editing
|
#8
/ 109
Usable
|
Kimi K2.6 |
| Translation & Localization |
#35
/ 110
Excellent
|
#22
/ 110
Excellent
|
Kimi K2.6 |
| RAG, Safety & Grounding |
#11
/ 113
Excellent
|
#18
/ 113
Excellent
|
Claude Opus 4.8 |
| Creative & Comedy | #17 / 110 | #11 / 110 | Kimi K2.6 |
| Customer Support |
#8
/ 113
Strong
|
#4
/ 113
Strong
|
Kimi K2.6 |
| Landing Pages |
#18
/ 72
Strong
|
#21
/ 72
Strong
|
Claude Opus 4.8 |
| Chef / Home Cooking |
#9
/ 126
Strong
|
#7
/ 126
Strong
|
Kimi K2.6 |
| Coding |
#3
/ 115
Excellent
|
#5
/ 115
Excellent
|
Claude Opus 4.8 |
| Executive Assistant |
#9
/ 112
Strong
|
#8
/ 112
Strong
|
Kimi K2.6 |
Rank = position among every model config we tested in that task area (lower is better). Sorted by biggest gap first.
Same task, both models — judged
Both models answered the same test case; an independent judge graded each. Quotes are the judge's actual rationale.
Summarization & Meeting Notes
Ferrovia Q2 business review (Executive Summary)
“The model hallucinated an action item owner by assigning Frank to produce the storage-cost model instead of just reviewing it.”
“The summary is flawless. It perfectly captures all outcomes, action items, and critical caveats (especially the explicit rejection of a decision to bundle) without any hallucinations or distortions. It is concise, well-structured, and neutral.”
Frequently asked
Is Claude Opus 4.8 better than Kimi K2.6?
Across 22 task areas we benchmarked, Claude Opus 4.8 ranks higher in 12 and Kimi K2.6 in 10.
Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.8 or Kimi K2.6?
Kimi K2.6 costs 7.4× less per token ($4.07 vs $30 per 1M).
What is Claude Opus 4.8 better at?
Claude Opus 4.8 out-ranks Kimi K2.6 at Product & Project Management, Training & Education, Data & Analytics.
What is Kimi K2.6 better at?
Kimi K2.6 out-ranks Claude Opus 4.8 at Structured Output, Summarization & Meeting Notes, Presentations & Decks.
More comparisons
This page is Spring Prompt, running in public
We just did this for every model. Do it for your prompt.
The rankings above come from running real tasks through real models and scoring every output. Spring Prompt is that same engine — pointed at your prompt, your test cases, and your definition of good.
- Generate test cases from your prompt — no eval set required to start.
- Compare models side by side with quality, cost and latency in one matrix.
- Optimise the winner until the scores say it's ready to ship.
Prompt × model results
12 test cases · 3 evals