Gemini 3.1 Pro vs Kimi K2.6
Wins 7 of 8 areas
Agents · Reasoning · Facts · Images and charts · Math · Long documents · Following instructions
Wins 0 of 8 areas
—
Gemini 3.1 Pro is the stronger all-rounder.Kimi K2.6 is cheaper.
Scores updated · 90 tests both models report · How we compare
Where each one wins
Tests won in each of the eight areas we test. Each piece is one test, so a longer bar means more evidence; grey means the two scored within a point of each other.
- MathCompetition and research-level math61Gemini 3.1 Pro6 of 7 tests
- ReasoningHard problems that need careful thinking40Gemini 3.1 Pro4 of 4 tests
- AgentsCarrying out multi-step tasks on its own42Gemini 3.1 Pro4 of 8 tests · 2 ties
- Following instructionsDoing exactly what it is asked20Gemini 3.1 Pro2 of 2 tests
- FactsGetting facts right instead of making them up21Gemini 3.1 Pro2 of 4 tests · 1 tie
- Images and chartsUnderstanding pictures, charts and video21Gemini 3.1 Pro2 of 3 tests
- Long documentsFinding answers in very long texts10Gemini 3.1 Pro1 of 1 test
- CodingWriting and fixing software44Even4 each · 2 ties
Long documents rests on a single test.
What it costs
Prices per million tokens, roughly 750,000 words. The bars show the cost of a million tokens read plus a million written.
Kimi K2.6 costs 65% less for the same work.
The biggest differences
The three tests each model wins by the widest margin. Scores are out of 100.
Where Gemini 3.1 Pro pulls ahead
- Short factual questions, answered correctlySimpleQA Verified+38.6points ahead
- Proof problems from the US Math OlympiadUSAMO 2026+23.2points ahead
- Answers hard knowledge questions correctlyAA-Omniscience · Accuracy+22.3points ahead
Where Kimi K2.6 pulls ahead
- Real work tasks from 44 professionsGDPVal+12.3points ahead
- Avoids making up answers it doesn't knowAA-Omniscience · Non-hallucination+10.4points ahead
- Olympiad math problems with short answersIMOAnswerBench+5points ahead
Every test, side by side
All 90 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
CodingEven
- Terminal-Bench HardGemini 3.1 Pro by 9.953.843.9+9.9
- Terminal-Bench 2.1Gemini 3.1 Pro by 7.973.865.9+7.9
- SciCodeGemini 3.1 Pro by 7.258.751.5+7.2
- LMArena · WebDevKimi K2.6 by 62 rating points14471509+62 rating
- SWE-bench ProKimi K2.6 by 4.454.258.6+4.4
- LiveBench · Agentic CodingKimi K2.6 by 2.844.146.9+2.8
- LiveBench · CodingKimi K2.6 by 2.176.578.6+2.1
- LiveCodeBench v6Gemini 3.1 Pro by 2.191.789.6+2.1
- SWE-bench Verifiedtie80.680.2tie
- SWE-bench Multilingualtie76.976.7tie
AgentsGemini 3.1 Pro
- GDPValKimi K2.6 by 12.314.727+12.3
- AA ApexAgentsGemini 3.1 Pro by 3.53228.5+3.5
- Terminal-Bench 4.0Gemini 3.1 Pro by 3.540.5+3.5
- OSWorld-VerifiedGemini 3.1 Pro by 3.176.273.1+3.1
- τ-Bench V3 · BankingKimi K2.6 by 1.921.423.3+1.9
- MCP AtlasGemini 3.1 Pro by 1.169.268.1+1.1
- AA IT-Bench SREtie30.331.2tie
- BrowseComptie85.986.3tie
ReasoningGemini 3.1 Pro
- CritPtGemini 3.1 Pro by 9.717.78+9.7
- Humanity's Last ExamGemini 3.1 Pro by 9.54737.5+9.5
- LiveBench · ReasoningGemini 3.1 Pro by 4.68479.4+4.6
- GPQA DiamondGemini 3.1 Pro by 394.191.1+3
FactsGemini 3.1 Pro
- SimpleQA VerifiedGemini 3.1 Pro by 38.673.534.9+38.6
- AA-Omniscience · AccuracyGemini 3.1 Pro by 22.354.932.6+22.3
- AA-Omniscience · Non-hallucinationKimi K2.6 by 10.449.159.5+10.4
- Vectara HHEM hallucination ratelower is bettertie10.410.8tie
Images and chartsGemini 3.1 Pro
- CharXiv (RQ)Kimi K2.6 by 3.483.386.7+3.4
- MMMU-ProGemini 3.1 Pro by 382.479.4+3
- LMArena · VisionGemini 3.1 Pro by 14 rating points12961282+14 rating
MathGemini 3.1 Pro
- USAMO 2026Gemini 3.1 Pro by 23.274.451.2+23.2
- LiveBench · MathematicsGemini 3.1 Pro by 6.79184.3+6.7
- IMOAnswerBenchKimi K2.6 by 58186+5
- FrontierMath Tiers 1-3 (v2)Gemini 3.1 Pro by 2.559.657.2+2.5
- HMMT Feb. 2026Gemini 3.1 Pro by 294.792.7+2
- AIME 2026Gemini 3.1 Pro by 1.998.396.4+1.9
- FrontierMath Tier 4Gemini 3.1 Pro by 1.226.825.6+1.2
Following instructionsGemini 3.1 Pro
- LiveBench · Instruction FollowingGemini 3.1 Pro by 14.779.164.4+14.7
- IFBenchGemini 3.1 Pro by 1.177.176+1.1
Other results51 tests, not counted
Tests outside the eight areas. They are not counted above: several are summary scores built from other tests, or the same test under another name.
- Apex (Pass@1)Gemini 3.1 Pro by 36.960.924+36.9
- AA-OmniscienceGemini 3.1 Pro by 26.631.95.3+26.6
- DeepSearchQA (accuracy)Kimi K2.6 by 22.860.283+22.8
- GDPval-AA v2Kimi K2.6 by 228 rating points9621190+228 rating
- HiL-Bench (Tools-allowed)Gemini 3.1 Pro by 16.635.318.7+16.6
- GDPval-AA (Elo)Kimi K2.6 by 165 rating points13171482+165 rating
- BabyVisionKimi K2.6 by 14.154.468.5+14.1
- Apex Shortlist (Pass@1)Gemini 3.1 Pro by 13.689.175.5+13.6
- livebench_data_analysisGemini 3.1 Pro by 13.478.565.1+13.4
- AA Agentic IndexKimi K2.6 by 11.810.322.1+11.8
- livebench_languageGemini 3.1 Pro by 10.385.475.1+10.3
- OJBench (python)Gemini 3.1 Pro by 10.170.760.6+10.1
- Chinese SimpleQA (C-SimpleQA)Gemini 3.1 Pro by 1085.975.9+10
- LiveBenchGemini 3.1 Pro by 7.779.972.2+7.7
- Artificial Analysis Coding IndexGemini 3.1 Pro by 768.861.8+7
- AgentWorldBench - MCPKimi K2.6 by 6.159.165.2+6.1
- AgentWorldBench - OSGemini 3.1 Pro by 6.166.960.8+6.1
- mmmu_pro_with_pythonGemini 3.1 Pro by 5.285.380.1+5.2
- SWEBench Pro PublicKimi K2.6 by 4.454.258.6+4.4
- Global-MMLU-LiteGemini 3.1 Pro by 4.392.788.4+4.3
- τ³-Bench BankingKimi K2.6 by 4.116.520.6+4.1
- MMLU-ProGemini 3.1 Pro by 3.99187.1+3.9
- MATH-VisionKimi K2.6 by 3.489.893.2+3.4
- charxiv_rq_with_pythonGemini 3.1 Pro by 3.289.986.7+3.2
- AA IntelligenceGemini 3.1 Pro by 2.729.727+2.7
- AgentWorldBench - SearchGemini 3.1 Pro by 2.730.227.5+2.7
- BrowseComp (w/ Ctx)Gemini 3.1 Pro by 2.785.983.2+2.7
- AgentWorldBench - WebGemini 3.1 Pro by 2.652.850.2+2.6
- HLE (with tools)Kimi K2.6 by 2.651.454+2.6
- MCPAtlas Public (Pass@1)Gemini 3.1 Pro by 2.669.266.6+2.6
- AgentWorldBench - AndroidGemini 3.1 Pro by 2.561.458.9+2.5
- mathvision_with_pythonGemini 3.1 Pro by 2.595.793.2+2.5
- frontiermath_tier_4_v1Gemini 3.1 Pro by 2.116.714.6+2.1
- LiveCodeBenchGemini 3.1 Pro by 2.191.789.6+2.1
- Finance Agent v2Kimi K2.6 by 1.94344.9+1.9
- StrongREJECTKimi K2.6 by 1.89899.8+1.8
- Terminal-Bench 2.0Gemini 3.1 Pro by 1.868.566.7+1.8
- AgentWorldBench - OverallGemini 3.1 Pro by 1.254.653.4+1.2
- ToolathlonKimi K2.6 by 1.248.850+1.2
- DeepSearchQA (F1)Kimi K2.6 by 1.181.983+1.1
- vectara_avg_summary_lengthtie107.7116.7tie
- BrowseComp (Agent Swarm)tie85.986.3tie
- vectara_factual_consistencytie89.689.2tie
- AgentWorldBench - SWEtie59.158.8tie
- vectara_answer_ratetie99.499.7tie
- τ²-Bench Telecom (AA run)tie95.695.9tie
- baby_vision_with_pythontie68.368.5tie
- AgentWorldBench - Terminaltie52.552.5tie
- MCPMarktie55.955.9tie
- Prophet Arenatie0.10.1tie
- V* (w/ python)tie96.996.9tie
Questions people ask
Which is better, Gemini 3.1 Pro or Kimi K2.6?
Gemini 3.1 Pro wins seven of the eight areas we test: agents, reasoning, facts, images and charts, math, long documents and following instructions. Kimi K2.6 wins none, but costs 65% less. They are level on coding.
Which is better for coding?
Neither. They win 4 coding tests each of the 10 both models report, and 2 are ties.
Which is cheaper?
Gemini 3.1 Pro costs $2.00 per million input tokens and $12.00 per million output tokens; Kimi K2.6 costs $0.95 and $4.00. That makes Kimi K2.6 about 65% cheaper for the same work.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 90 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 39 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 51 are listed but not counted, because several are summary scores or repeat a test. Each score is the one shown on the model's own page.