Model Comparison
Gemma 4 31B (Non-reasoning)
vs. Kimi K2.6
Comparing 2 AI models · 7 benchmarks · Google, MoonshotAI
Recommended Pick
Mo Kimi K2.6 10 metric wins Strongest on: Reasoning, Intelligence, Coding
Best Value
Gemma 4 31B (Non-reasoning)
100.0 value score
40.0 reasoning / $0.21/1M
Lowest Price
Gemma 4 31B (Non-reasoning)
$0.14/1M input price
Best Reasoning
Kimi K2.6
60.3 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
Kimi K2.6
47.1 coding index
Composite Indices
Higher is better; speed and price are normalized
Standard Benchmarks
Only benchmarks with data are shown
Differences That Matter
Best value
Gemma 4 31B (Non-reasoning) has the strongest quality-to-price mix at 100.0 out of 100 value points.
Price gap
Gemma 4 31B (Non-reasoning) is 6.8x cheaper on input tokens than Kimi K2.6.
Speed gap
Gemma 4 31B (Non-reasoning) generates about 1.1x as many tokens per second as Kimi K2.6.
Reasoning gap
Kimi K2.6 leads Gemma 4 31B (Non-reasoning) by 20.3 points on reasoning.
Coding gap
Kimi K2.6 leads Gemma 4 31B (Non-reasoning) by 13.2 points on coding.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
Gemma 4 31B (Non-reasoning)
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Kimi K2.6
MoonshotAI
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Full Comparison
| Metric | Go Gemma 4 31B (Non-reasoning) | Top Pick Mo Kimi K2.6 |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $0.14/1M | $0.95/1M |
| Output Cost | $0.40/1M | $4.00/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.21/1M | $1.71/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | MoonshotAI | |
| Release Date | Apr 2, 2026 | Apr 20, 2026 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | 43.4 tok/s | 40.8 tok/s |
| TTFT | 933ms | 1272ms |
| Latency | 933ms | 110450ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 100.0 | 18.0 |
| Reasoning Score | 40.0 | 60.3 |
| Intelligence | 32.3 | 53.9 |
| Coding | 33.9 | 47.1 |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 76.3% | 91.1% |
| HLE | 11.5% | 35.9% |
| SciCode | 41.1% | 53.5% |
| LCR | 36.0% | 69.7% |
| IFBench | 53.5% | 76.0% |
| TAU-bench v2 | 65.5% | 95.9% |
| TerminalBench Hard | 30.3% | 43.9% |
Key Takeaways
Gemma 4 31B (Non-reasoning) offers the best value at $0.14/1M, making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
Kimi K2.6 has the strongest reasoning profile with a 60.3 reasoning score, combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
Kimi K2.6 reaches a 47.1 coding index, making it the top choice for software development and code generation tasks.
All models support context windows of ∞+ tokens, suitable for processing lengthy documents and maintaining extended conversations.
When to Choose Each Model
Gemma 4 31B (Non-reasoning)
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
Kimi K2.6
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
- Code generation
- Software development
