Comparison
Claude Haiku 4.5 vs Kimi K2.6
How Claude Haiku 4.5 and Kimi K2.6 compare on the numbers that decide the call - and how to switch between them without touching your code.
| Spec | Claude Haiku 4.5 | Kimi K2.6 |
|---|---|---|
| Input price / 1Mlower is cheaper | $1 | $0.95 |
| Output price / 1Mlower is cheaper | $5 | $4 |
| Context windowbigger fits more | 200K | 262K |
| Typical speedfaster median | 420ms | 1.3s |
| Quality score | 84/100 | 87/100 |
| Provider | Anthropic | Moonshot AI |
Which should you pick?
- Kimi K2.6 is cheaper on input tokens ($0.95 vs $1).
- Kimi K2.6 takes a larger context window (262K tokens).
- Claude Haiku 4.5 is usually the faster to answer.
- Kimi K2.6 scores higher on the composite quality benchmark.
You do not have to choose permanently. Name one as your first choice and let Final Router fall back to the other when a provider fails - the request still gets answered, and the log shows which model replied.
Common questions
- Is Claude Haiku 4.5 or Kimi K2.6 cheaper?
- Kimi K2.6 is cheaper on input tokens - $0.95 vs $1 per 1M. Neither is marked up: Final Router bills provider list price.
- Can I switch between Claude Haiku 4.5 and Kimi K2.6 without changing my code?
- Yes. Both are called through the same OpenAI-compatible endpoint - change only the model id ("anthropic/claude-haiku-4-5" or "moonshot/kimi-k2.6"), or let a routing policy fall back from one to the other automatically.