Model comparison
Kimi K3 vs Qwen2.5 32B Instruct
Kimi K3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 59.5 to 30.1 on the Noometry Index. Qwen2.5 32B Instruct costs 4.9× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Kimi K3's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 4 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 4 benchmarks with published results for both. Kimi K3 scores higher in 4 categories and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct in 0 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Kimi K3 leads 74.2 to 16.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 97.2% for Kimi K3 and 7.4% for Qwen2.5 32B Instruct.
- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct is cheaper at $0.70 / $2.80 per million input/output tokens, against $3 / $15 for Kimi K3.
- Kimi K3 accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 131K.
Side by side
| Kimi K3 | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Moonshot AI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 59.5 | 30.1 |
| Released | 2026-07-16 | 2024-09 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 1.05M | 131K |
| Max output | 1.05M | 8K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $3 | $0.70 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $15 | $2.80 |
| Results tracked | 53 | 7 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Kimi K3 leads
Kimi K3: 61.0 (#10), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 38.7 (#169)
| Benchmark | Kimi K3 | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| DeepSWE | 68.5% | — |
| FrontierCode | 44.2% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1654 | — |
| FrontierSWE | 25.9% | — |
| SciCode | 59.5% | — |
| WeirdML | 82.6% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 45% |
| LMArena Coding | 1508 | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 52.3% |
| ALE-Bench | 1,524 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Kimi K3: 41.8 (#20), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Kimi K3 | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 50.6% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | 37.1% | — |
| PostTrainBench | 32% | — |
| GBAEval | 48.3% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 19% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 5,165 | — |
Reasoning Kimi K3 leads
Kimi K3: 63.0 (#17), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 19.2 (#266)
| Benchmark | Kimi K3 | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 39% | 0% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 157.45 | 128.52 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 60.4% | — |
| SimpleBench | 60.7% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 93.6% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 94.5% | — |
| CritPt | 23.4% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1496 | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 26% | — |
| DTBench | 91.2% | — |
| LMCA | 52.7% | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 95% | — |
| ForecastBench | 61.1 | — |
Math Kimi K3 leads
Kimi K3: 74.2 (#16), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 16.2 (#296)
| Benchmark | Kimi K3 | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 97.2% | 7.4% |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 72.2% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 39% | — |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 87.8% | — |
| ProofBench | 87% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1491 | — |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 56.1% |
Knowledge Kimi K3 leads
Kimi K3: 63.2 (#21), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 24.9 (#266)
| Benchmark | Kimi K3 | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 93.1% | 46.1% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 50.6% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1521 | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Kimi K3: 37.8 (#70), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Kimi K3 | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 29.5% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 34.2% | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Kimi K3: 56.3 (#21), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Kimi K3 | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1466 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1529 | — |
| LMArena French | 1491 | — |
| LMArena German | 1488 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1487 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1458 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1482 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1472 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Kimi K3: 77.7 (#14), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Kimi K3 | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1483 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Kimi K3: 45.8 (#29), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Kimi K3 | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1494 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Kimi K3: 76.6 (#4), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Kimi K3 | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1476 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1454 | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 2082 | — |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1339 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1488 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Kimi K3 better than Qwen2.5 32B Instruct?
Kimi K3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 59.5 to 30.1 on the Noometry Index. Qwen2.5 32B Instruct costs 4.9× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Kimi K3's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Kimi K3 or Qwen2.5 32B Instruct?
Qwen2.5 32B Instruct is cheaper. It lists at $0.70 per million input tokens and $2.80 per million output tokens; Kimi K3 lists at $3 and $15.
Is Kimi K3 or Qwen2.5 32B Instruct better for coding?
Kimi K3 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 61.0 versus 38.7 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Kimi K3 does, with 1.05M tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks do Kimi K3 and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct share?
4 benchmarks have published results for both models. Kimi K3 has 53 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct has 7.