Model comparison

Kimi K2.5 vs Qwen3.6 Max Preview

Qwen3.6 Max Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.5 to 48.1 on the Noometry Index. Kimi K2.5 costs 3.2× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.6 Max Preview's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 26 shared benchmarks.

Kimi K2.5 Moonshot AI

48.1

Rank #57 Confirmed

Qwen3.6 Max Preview Alibaba (Qwen)

51.5

Rank #43 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 26 benchmarks with published results for both. Kimi K2.5 scores higher in 3 categories and Qwen3.6 Max Preview in 5 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads 41.7 to 31.2.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is SimpleQA Verified: 34.3% for Kimi K2.5 and 52% for Qwen3.6 Max Preview.
  • Kimi K2.5 is cheaper at $0.45 / $2.25 per million input/output tokens, against $1.30 / $7.80 for Qwen3.6 Max Preview.
  • Kimi K2.5 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Kimi K2.5 and Qwen3.6 Max Preview specifications
Kimi K2.5Qwen3.6 Max Preview
ProviderMoonshot AIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index48.151.5
Released2026-01-272026-04-20
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window262K262K
Max output262K66K
Input $ / M tokens$0.45$1.30
Output $ / M tokens$2.25$7.80
Results tracked5129

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

Category by category

Coding Too close to call

Kimi K2.5: 48.8 (#53), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 48.7 (#54)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkKimi K2.5Qwen3.6 Max Preview
SWE-bench Verified73.8%76.7%
LMArena WebDev14371482
LMArena Coding14741471
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)70.8%—
SWE-bench Multilingual67.3%—
SciCode49%—
WeirdML45.6%—
ALE-Bench821.65—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Kimi K2.5: 34.2 (#48), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkKimi K2.5Qwen3.6 Max Preview
Vending-Bench 21,1984,254
Terminal-Bench43.2%—
OSWorld63.3%—

Reasoning Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads

Kimi K2.5: 31.2 (#80), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 41.7 (#53)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkKimi K2.5Qwen3.6 Max Preview
SimpleBench46.8%63%
NYT Connections (extended)69.9%74.1%
Chess Puzzles12%20%
LMArena Hard Prompts14531457
Epoch Capabilities Index148.03149.24
ARC-AGI-211.8%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark78.5%—
ARC-AGI-165.3%—
CritPt3.1%—
EnigmaEval3.4%—
Thematic Generalization69.4%—
Mystery Game Puzzles—19%
DTBench—87.2%
LMCA—42.5%

Math Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads

Kimi K2.5: 51.8 (#53), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 54.1 (#46)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkKimi K2.5Qwen3.6 Max Preview
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202592.2%91.1%
LMArena Math14701465
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)27.9%23.1%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)4.2%4.2%
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions62.3%—

Knowledge Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads

Kimi K2.5: 53.6 (#56), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 57.6 (#39)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkKimi K2.5Qwen3.6 Max Preview
GPQA Diamond87.6%87.4%
SimpleQA Verified34.3%52%
LMArena Expert14661478
Humanity's Last Exam24.4%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate14.2%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Kimi K2.5: 41.1 (#39), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkKimi K2.5Qwen3.6 Max Preview
LMArena Vision1269—
LMArena Document1430—

Multilingual Too close to call

Kimi K2.5: 53.9 (#53), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 54.2 (#48)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkKimi K2.5Qwen3.6 Max Preview
LMArena Non-English14331437
LMArena Chinese14951487
LMArena French14541449
LMArena Russian14351445
LMArena Spanish14501454
LMArena German1441—
LMArena Japanese1421—
LMArena Korean1410—

Instruction Following Too close to call

Kimi K2.5: 75.3 (#64), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 75.7 (#55)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkKimi K2.5Qwen3.6 Max Preview
LMArena Instruction Following14311438

Long Context Kimi K2.5 leads

Kimi K2.5: 52.1 (#7), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 44.6 (#61)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkKimi K2.5Qwen3.6 Max Preview
LMArena Longer Query14451457
Fiction.LiveBench86.1%—
CL-bench19.3%—
CL-bench Life13.2%—

Writing & Preference Kimi K2.5 leads

Kimi K2.5: 65.1 (#53), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 63.8 (#60)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkKimi K2.5Qwen3.6 Max Preview
LMArena Text14451447
LMArena Creative Writing14231435
LMArena Multi-Turn14441456
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1579—

Frequently asked questions

Is Kimi K2.5 better than Qwen3.6 Max Preview?

Qwen3.6 Max Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.5 to 48.1 on the Noometry Index. Kimi K2.5 costs 3.2× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.6 Max Preview's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Kimi K2.5 or Qwen3.6 Max Preview?

Kimi K2.5 is cheaper. It lists at $0.45 per million input tokens and $2.25 per million output tokens; Qwen3.6 Max Preview lists at $1.30 and $7.80.

Is Kimi K2.5 or Qwen3.6 Max Preview better for coding?

They score almost the same on coding (48.8 vs 48.7); test both on your own repository before choosing.

Which has the bigger context window?

Both accept 262K tokens.

How many benchmarks do Kimi K2.5 and Qwen3.6 Max Preview share?

26 benchmarks have published results for both models. Kimi K2.5 has 51 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 Max Preview has 29.

Related comparisons

Go deeper