Noometry

Model comparison

Kimi K2.5 Instant vs Qwen3.5-Flash

Kimi K2.5 Instant is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.6 to 42.5 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.

Kimi K2.5 Instant Moonshot AI

43.6

Rank #89 Confirmed

Qwen3.5-Flash Alibaba (Qwen)

42.5

Rank #112 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Kimi K2.5 Instant scores higher in 6 categories and Qwen3.5-Flash in 2 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in coding, where Kimi K2.5 Instant leads 42.6 to 34.2.
  • Kimi K2.5 Instant has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Kimi K2.5 InstantQwen3.5-Flash
ProviderMoonshot AIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index43.642.5
Released—2026-02-23
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window—1M
Max output—66K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.10
Output $ / M tokens—$0.40
Results tracked1832

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

Category by category

Coding Kimi K2.5 Instant leads

Kimi K2.5 Instant: 42.6 (#97), Qwen3.5-Flash: 34.2 (#242)

BenchmarkKimi K2.5 InstantQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena WebDev14041244
LMArena Coding14841412
ALE-Bench—221.8

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Kimi K2.5 Instant: —, Qwen3.5-Flash: —

BenchmarkKimi K2.5 InstantQwen3.5-Flash
Vending-Bench 2—462.69

Reasoning Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Kimi K2.5 Instant: 29.7 (#90), Qwen3.5-Flash: 33.7 (#72)

BenchmarkKimi K2.5 InstantQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Hard Prompts14431403
Chess Puzzles—21%
Mystery Game Puzzles—20%
DTBench—82.9%
LMCA—29.1%
Epoch Capabilities Index—143.98

Math Kimi K2.5 Instant leads

Kimi K2.5 Instant: 39.4 (#105), Qwen3.5-Flash: 37.4 (#158)

BenchmarkKimi K2.5 InstantQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Math14421407
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—18.2%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—84.4%
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)—6.2%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)—0%

Knowledge Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Kimi K2.5 Instant: 40.2 (#123), Qwen3.5-Flash: 43.2 (#93)

BenchmarkKimi K2.5 InstantQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Expert14401407
GPQA Diamond—82.3%
SimpleQA Verified—20.3%
Vectara Hallucination Rate—10.5%

Multimodal Not comparable

Kimi K2.5 Instant: 40.2 (#50), Qwen3.5-Flash: —

BenchmarkKimi K2.5 InstantQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Vision1254—

Multilingual Kimi K2.5 Instant leads

Kimi K2.5 Instant: 52.0 (#94), Qwen3.5-Flash: 50.5 (#121)

BenchmarkKimi K2.5 InstantQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Non-English14061385
LMArena Chinese14491446
LMArena French14031412
LMArena German14131390
LMArena Korean13781344
LMArena Russian14041379
LMArena Spanish14471400
LMArena Japanese—1368

Instruction Following Kimi K2.5 Instant leads

Kimi K2.5 Instant: 75.3 (#65), Qwen3.5-Flash: 72.6 (#139)

BenchmarkKimi K2.5 InstantQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Instruction Following14301374

Long Context Kimi K2.5 Instant leads

Kimi K2.5 Instant: 43.9 (#83), Qwen3.5-Flash: 42.4 (#124)

BenchmarkKimi K2.5 InstantQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Longer Query14351392

Writing & Preference Kimi K2.5 Instant leads

Kimi K2.5 Instant: 60.6 (#95), Qwen3.5-Flash: 57.9 (#122)

BenchmarkKimi K2.5 InstantQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Text14201397
LMArena Creative Writing13811343
LMArena Multi-Turn14271393

Frequently asked questions

Is Kimi K2.5 Instant better than Qwen3.5-Flash?

Kimi K2.5 Instant is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.6 to 42.5 on the Noometry Index.

Is Kimi K2.5 Instant or Qwen3.5-Flash better for coding?

Kimi K2.5 Instant scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.6 versus 34.2 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Kimi K2.5 Instant and Qwen3.5-Flash share?

17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Kimi K2.5 Instant has 18 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5-Flash has 32.

Related comparisons

Go deeper