Comparison
Claude Opus 5 vs Kimi K2.6
How Claude Opus 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 Opus 5 | Kimi K2.6 |
|---|---|---|
| Input price / 1Mlower is cheaper | $5 | $0.95 |
| Output price / 1Mlower is cheaper | $25 | $4 |
| Context windowbigger fits more | 1M | 262K |
| Typical speedfaster median | 2.1s | 1.3s |
| Quality score | 98/100 | 87/100 |
| Provider | Anthropic | Moonshot AI |
Which should you pick?
- Kimi K2.6 is cheaper on input tokens ($0.95 vs $5).
- Claude Opus 5 takes a larger context window (1M tokens).
- Kimi K2.6 is usually the faster to answer.
- Claude Opus 5 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 Opus 5 or Kimi K2.6 cheaper?
- Kimi K2.6 is cheaper on input tokens - $0.95 vs $5 per 1M. Neither is marked up: Final Router bills provider list price.
- Can I switch between Claude Opus 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-opus-5" or "moonshot/kimi-k2.6"), or let a routing policy fall back from one to the other automatically.