Noometry

Model comparison

Kimi K2.5 vs Qwen1.5-14B

Kimi K2.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.8 to 32.1 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 16 shared benchmarks.

Kimi K2.5 Moonshot AI

47.8

Rank #50 Confirmed

Qwen1.5-14B Alibaba (Qwen)

32.1

Rank #250 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 16 benchmarks with published results for both. Kimi K2.5 scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen1.5-14B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Kimi K2.5 leads 65.3 to 33.7.

Side by side

Kimi K2.5Qwen1.5-14B
ProviderMoonshot AIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index47.832.1
Released2026-01-272024-02-04
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window262K—
Max output262K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.45—
Output $ / M tokens$2.25—
Results tracked5117

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

Category by category

Coding Kimi K2.5 leads

Kimi K2.5: 48.7 (#48), Qwen1.5-14B: 32.5 (#259)

BenchmarkKimi K2.5Qwen1.5-14B
LMArena Coding14741138
SWE-bench Verified73.8%—
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)70.8%—
LMArena WebDev1436—
SWE-bench Multilingual67.3%—
SciCode49%—
WeirdML45.6%—
ALE-Bench821.65—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Kimi K2.5: 34.0 (#44), Qwen1.5-14B: —

BenchmarkKimi K2.5Qwen1.5-14B
Terminal-Bench43.2%—
OSWorld63.3%—
Vending-Bench 21,198—

Reasoning Kimi K2.5 leads

Kimi K2.5: 31.2 (#74), Qwen1.5-14B: 20.5 (#217)

BenchmarkKimi K2.5Qwen1.5-14B
LMArena Hard Prompts14541113
ARC-AGI-211.8%—
SimpleBench46.8%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark78.5%—
NYT Connections (extended)69.9%—
ARC-AGI-165.3%—
CritPt3.1%—
Chess Puzzles12%—
EnigmaEval3.4%—
Thematic Generalization69.4%—
Epoch Capabilities Index148.05—

Math Kimi K2.5 leads

Kimi K2.5: 50.3 (#46), Qwen1.5-14B: 29.9 (#214)

BenchmarkKimi K2.5Qwen1.5-14B
LMArena Math14701125
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions62.3%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202592.2%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)27.9%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)4.2%—

Knowledge Kimi K2.5 leads

Kimi K2.5: 53.6 (#52), Qwen1.5-14B: 29.3 (#230)

BenchmarkKimi K2.5Qwen1.5-14B
LMArena Expert14661094
GPQA Diamond87.6%—
Humanity's Last Exam24.4%—
SimpleQA Verified34.3%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate14.2%—
MMLU—68.6%

Multimodal Not comparable

Kimi K2.5: 40.4 (#37), Qwen1.5-14B: —

BenchmarkKimi K2.5Qwen1.5-14B
LMArena Vision1269—
LMArena Document1430—

Multilingual Kimi K2.5 leads

Kimi K2.5: 54.1 (#50), Qwen1.5-14B: 30.8 (#257)

BenchmarkKimi K2.5Qwen1.5-14B
LMArena Non-English14331095
LMArena Chinese14951147
LMArena French14541115
LMArena German14411043
LMArena Japanese14221019
LMArena Russian14361046
LMArena Spanish14501085
LMArena Korean1412—

Instruction Following Kimi K2.5 leads

Kimi K2.5: 75.5 (#60), Qwen1.5-14B: 57.1 (#266)

BenchmarkKimi K2.5Qwen1.5-14B
LMArena Instruction Following14311102

Long Context Kimi K2.5 leads

Kimi K2.5: 52.1 (#7), Qwen1.5-14B: 33.7 (#252)

BenchmarkKimi K2.5Qwen1.5-14B
LMArena Longer Query14451113
Fiction.LiveBench86.1%—
CL-bench19.3%—
CL-bench Life13.2%—

Writing & Preference Kimi K2.5 leads

Kimi K2.5: 65.3 (#51), Qwen1.5-14B: 33.7 (#270)

BenchmarkKimi K2.5Qwen1.5-14B
LMArena Text14451128
LMArena Creative Writing14231091
LMArena Multi-Turn14441110
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1579—

Frequently asked questions

Is Kimi K2.5 better than Qwen1.5-14B?

Kimi K2.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.8 to 32.1 on the Noometry Index.

Is Kimi K2.5 or Qwen1.5-14B better for coding?

Kimi K2.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 48.7 versus 32.5 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Kimi K2.5 and Qwen1.5-14B share?

16 benchmarks have published results for both models. Kimi K2.5 has 51 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-14B has 17.

Related comparisons

Go deeper