head-to-head
| Metric | GPT-5.6 Sol | Kimi K3 |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified | 96.2% | 93.4% |
| SWE-bench Pro | — | — |
| Terminal-Bench | 88.8% | 88.3% |
| Input $ / 1M | $5 | $3 |
| Output $ / 1M | $30 | $15 |
| Context | — | 1M |
| Open weights | No | Yes |
| Access | API · Codex (public since Jul 9 2026) | API · app · open weights promised Jul 27, 2026 |
| Maker | OpenAI | Moonshot AI |
what do the benchmarks actually say?
On SWE-bench Verified — real, human-validated GitHub issues resolved end-to-end — GPT-5.6 Sol posts 96.2% against 93.4% for Kimi K3, a 2.8-point gap. Verified is the closest public proxy for "can it fix a real bug in a real repo without help", which is why it anchors our ranking.
A few points either way is real but not decisive: within that band, the agent scaffolding around the model — how it retrieves files, runs tests, and retries — often matters as much as the base model. Treat the gap as a lean, not a verdict.
which is cheaper to run?
Kimi K3 is the cheaper model: $3 per 1M input tokens ($15 output) versus $5 ($30 output) for GPT-5.6 Sol — roughly 1.7× less on input. Coding workloads are output-heavy — agents write diffs, tests and retries — so weight the output rate more than the input rate when you estimate a monthly bill.
Kimi K3 ships open weights. Beyond the per-token discount, that means you can self-host it, fine-tune it, pin a snapshot so the model can't change under you, and keep code on your own infrastructure — none of which is possible with GPT-5.6 Sol, which is API-only. For teams with compliance constraints that difference outweighs any benchmark point.
when to pick each
The highest independently measured coding score of any model, and it holds up on the long tasks: 98% on the 1-to-4-hour tier where most models fall apart.
The highest-scoring open-weight model on the board and the largest ever announced (2.8T MoE, 16 of 896 experts active): frontier-adjacent coding you can eventually self-host, at a third of Fable 5's price.
how were these scores verified?
We only print a number once it's confirmed against a primary source or an independent evaluation, and each row on our leaderboard records which kind it is:
- GPT-5.6 Sol: Independent (vals.ai, Jul 14 2026, mini-swe-agent bash-only harness): SWE-bench Verified 96.20% ±0.86 — the top score on the board. Verified Jul 17, 2026; it had been unranked since Jun 26 because OpenAI published no SWE-bench number of its own, and it still has not. Read the #1 with care: the 1.2-point lead over Claude Fable 5 (95.00% ±0.98) is inside the combined margin of error (~0.9 sigma, not significant), so the two are a statistical tie and we rank Sol first only because it scored higher. Where it does separate is task length — 98% on 1-4 hour tasks vs 93% for Fable 5. OpenAI's own Terminal-Bench 2.1 claim is 88.8% (Sol) / 91.9% (Sol Ultra). No SWE-bench Pro score published. Pricing $5/$30 per 1M.
- Kimi K3: Independent (vals.ai, mini-swe-agent bash-only harness): SWE-bench Verified 93.40% ±1.11. Verified Jul 18, 2026 — vals.ai had not run K3 at our Jul 17 check and now ranks it third overall (above GPT-5.6 Luna at 93.0% and Claude Opus 4.8 at 88.6%), making it the highest-scoring open-weight coder we track. Moonshot published no SWE-bench Verified score of its own, only Terminal-Bench 2.1 88.3% on its KimiCode harness, so we rank on the independent number per our standing rule. Also 3rd on Artificial Analysis GDPval-AA v2 and 2nd on AA-Briefcase. Price: Moonshot API $3/$15 per 1M (cache-hit input $0.30); open weights promised Jul 27, 2026.
Full reviewsGPT-5.6 Sol, decodedKimi K3, decoded
Ranked on our AI Coding Leaderboard, updated 2026-07-18. Scores are confirmed against primary sources; prices are per 1M input tokens and can change.
- OpenAIvals.ai — SWE-bench Verified (independent) — Independent (vals.ai, Jul 14 2026, mini-swe-agent bash-only harness): SWE-bench Verified 96.20% ±0.86 — the top score on the board. Verified Jul 17, 2026; it had been unranked since Jun 26 because OpenAI published no SWE-bench number of its own, and it still has not. Read the #1 with care: the 1.2-point lead over Claude Fable 5 (95.00% ±0.98) is inside the combined margin of error (~0.9 sigma, not significant), so the two are a statistical tie and we rank Sol first only because it scored higher. Where it does separate is task length — 98% on 1-4 hour tasks vs 93% for Fable 5. OpenAI's own Terminal-Bench 2.1 claim is 88.8% (Sol) / 91.9% (Sol Ultra). No SWE-bench Pro score published. Pricing $5/$30 per 1M.
- Moonshot AIvals.ai — SWE-bench Verified (independent) — Independent (vals.ai, mini-swe-agent bash-only harness): SWE-bench Verified 93.40% ±1.11. Verified Jul 18, 2026 — vals.ai had not run K3 at our Jul 17 check and now ranks it third overall (above GPT-5.6 Luna at 93.0% and Claude Opus 4.8 at 88.6%), making it the highest-scoring open-weight coder we track. Moonshot published no SWE-bench Verified score of its own, only Terminal-Bench 2.1 88.3% on its KimiCode harness, so we rank on the independent number per our standing rule. Also 3rd on Artificial Analysis GDPval-AA v2 and 2nd on AA-Briefcase. Price: Moonshot API $3/$15 per 1M (cache-hit input $0.30); open weights promised Jul 27, 2026.
- BenchmarkSWE-bench — the real-GitHub-issue benchmark