Side-by-side comparison
Grok 4.20 vs Kimi K2.6
MoonshotAI
Kimi K2.6
👁 Vision
🔧 Tools
{} JSON
Input / 1M
$0.7300
Output / 1M
$3.4900
| Grok 4.20 | Kimi K2.6 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | MoonshotAI |
| Context window Maximum tokens (input + output) the model can process in a single request. Glossary → | 2,000,000 | 262,142 |
| Capabilities Optional capabilities the model advertises: vision (images), tools (function calling), json_mode (structured output). | vision, tools, json_mode | vision, tools, json_mode |
| Input $ / 1M tokens Cost for tokens you send (prompt + context). Cheaper side highlighted. Glossary → | 1.2500 | 0.7300 |
| Output $ / 1M tokens Cost for tokens the model generates. Output is normally 3–5× pricier than input. Glossary → | 2.5000 | 3.4900 |
Frequently asked questions
Which is cheaper, Grok 4.20 or Kimi K2.6?
Grok 4.20 is cheaper than Kimi K2.6 on a 50/50 input/output blend by about $0.235 per 1M tokens. Exact savings depend on your input-vs-output ratio — use the cost calculator on this page for a workload-specific estimate.
Which has a larger context window, Grok 4.20 or Kimi K2.6?
Grok 4.20 has the larger context window at 2M tokens versus 262k tokens for Kimi K2.6. That means Grok 4.20 can ingest about 7.6x as much text per request.
What is the difference between Grok 4.20 and Kimi K2.6?
Grok 4.20 comes from xAI; Kimi K2.6 comes from MoonshotAI. They differ in pricing, context window, and supported capabilities — see the side-by-side table on this page for the exact figures, refreshed nightly.