Noometry

Model comparison

Kimi K2.5 Instant vs Qwen3.8 Max

Qwen3.8 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.8 to 43.6 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 18 shared benchmarks.

Kimi K2.5 Instant Moonshot AI

43.6

Rank #89 Confirmed

Qwen3.8 Max Alibaba (Qwen)

56.8

Rank #22 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. Kimi K2.5 Instant scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3.8 Max in 8 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Qwen3.8 Max leads 73.2 to 39.4.
  • Kimi K2.5 Instant has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Kimi K2.5 InstantQwen3.8 Max
ProviderMoonshot AIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index43.656.8
Released—2026-08-02
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window—1M
Max output—131K
Input $ / M tokens—$2
Output $ / M tokens—$6
Results tracked1839

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Qwen3.8 Max leads

Kimi K2.5 Instant: 42.6 (#97), Qwen3.8 Max: 53.5 (#29)

BenchmarkKimi K2.5 InstantQwen3.8 Max
LMArena WebDev14041674
LMArena Coding14841502
DeepSWE—57.5%
FrontierSWE—17.8%
SciCode—53.2%

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Kimi K2.5 Instant: —, Qwen3.8 Max: 45.4 (#14)

BenchmarkKimi K2.5 InstantQwen3.8 Max
APEX-Agents—63.3%
τ²-bench Banking—55.1%
GDP.pdf—23.2%

Reasoning Qwen3.8 Max leads

Kimi K2.5 Instant: 29.7 (#90), Qwen3.8 Max: 54.4 (#26)

BenchmarkKimi K2.5 InstantQwen3.8 Max
LMArena Hard Prompts14431496
NYT Connections (extended)—88.3%
CritPt—20%
Chess Puzzles—40%
Mystery Game Puzzles—38%
DTBench—92%
LMCA—46.2%
Epoch Capabilities Index—156.41

Math Qwen3.8 Max leads

Kimi K2.5 Instant: 39.4 (#105), Qwen3.8 Max: 73.2 (#20)

BenchmarkKimi K2.5 InstantQwen3.8 Max
LMArena Math14421499
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—74.7%
FrontierMath Tier 4—46.3%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—100%
ProofBench—58%

Knowledge Qwen3.8 Max leads

Kimi K2.5 Instant: 40.2 (#123), Qwen3.8 Max: 61.7 (#27)

BenchmarkKimi K2.5 InstantQwen3.8 Max
LMArena Expert14401507
GPQA Diamond—92.7%
SimpleQA Verified—47.3%

Multimodal Kimi K2.5 Instant leads

Kimi K2.5 Instant: 40.2 (#50), Qwen3.8 Max: 37.2 (#75)

BenchmarkKimi K2.5 InstantQwen3.8 Max
LMArena Vision12541314
Furniture Assembly—20%

Multilingual Qwen3.8 Max leads

Kimi K2.5 Instant: 52.0 (#94), Qwen3.8 Max: 56.7 (#18)

BenchmarkKimi K2.5 InstantQwen3.8 Max
LMArena Non-English14061472
LMArena Chinese14491538
LMArena French14031503
LMArena German14131483
LMArena Korean13781461
LMArena Russian14041481
LMArena Spanish14471492
LMArena Japanese—1467

Instruction Following Qwen3.8 Max leads

Kimi K2.5 Instant: 75.3 (#65), Qwen3.8 Max: 77.6 (#17)

BenchmarkKimi K2.5 InstantQwen3.8 Max
LMArena Instruction Following14301479

Long Context Qwen3.8 Max leads

Kimi K2.5 Instant: 43.9 (#83), Qwen3.8 Max: 45.6 (#31)

BenchmarkKimi K2.5 InstantQwen3.8 Max
LMArena Longer Query14351489

Writing & Preference Qwen3.8 Max leads

Kimi K2.5 Instant: 60.6 (#95), Qwen3.8 Max: 67.1 (#30)

BenchmarkKimi K2.5 InstantQwen3.8 Max
LMArena Text14201483
LMArena Creative Writing13811479
LMArena Multi-Turn14271489

Frequently asked questions

Is Kimi K2.5 Instant better than Qwen3.8 Max?

Qwen3.8 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.8 to 43.6 on the Noometry Index.

Is Kimi K2.5 Instant or Qwen3.8 Max better for coding?

Qwen3.8 Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 53.5 versus 42.6 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Kimi K2.5 Instant and Qwen3.8 Max share?

18 benchmarks have published results for both models. Kimi K2.5 Instant has 18 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.8 Max has 39.

Related comparisons

Go deeper