Noometry

Model comparison

Kimi K2.5 vs Qwen1.5-32B

Kimi K2.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.1 to 30.5 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 18 shared benchmarks.

Kimi K2.5 Moonshot AI

48.1

Rank #57 Confirmed

Qwen1.5-32B Alibaba (Qwen)

30.5

Rank #293 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. Kimi K2.5 scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen1.5-32B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Kimi K2.5 leads 53.6 to 13.5.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 87.6% for Kimi K2.5 and 30.7% for Qwen1.5-32B.

Side by side

Kimi K2.5Qwen1.5-32B
ProviderMoonshot AIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index48.130.5
Released2026-01-272024-02-04
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window262K—
Max output262K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.45—
Output $ / M tokens$2.25—
Results tracked5121

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

Category by category

Coding Kimi K2.5 leads

Kimi K2.5: 48.8 (#53), Qwen1.5-32B: 31.7 (#282)

BenchmarkKimi K2.5Qwen1.5-32B
LMArena Coding14741155
SWE-bench Verified73.8%—
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)70.8%—
LMArena WebDev1437—
SWE-bench Multilingual67.3%—
SciCode49%—
WeirdML45.6%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—32.3%
BigCodeBench Complete—42%
ALE-Bench821.65—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Kimi K2.5: 34.2 (#48), Qwen1.5-32B: —

BenchmarkKimi K2.5Qwen1.5-32B
Terminal-Bench43.2%—
OSWorld63.3%—
Vending-Bench 21,198—

Reasoning Kimi K2.5 leads

Kimi K2.5: 31.2 (#80), Qwen1.5-32B: 21.8 (#212)

BenchmarkKimi K2.5Qwen1.5-32B
LMArena Hard Prompts14531130
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 Index148.03—

Math Kimi K2.5 leads

Kimi K2.5: 51.8 (#53), Qwen1.5-32B: 33.0 (#207)

BenchmarkKimi K2.5Qwen1.5-32B
LMArena Math14701155
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 (#56), Qwen1.5-32B: 13.5 (#296)

BenchmarkKimi K2.5Qwen1.5-32B
GPQA Diamond87.6%30.7%
LMArena Expert14661126
Humanity's Last Exam24.4%—
SimpleQA Verified34.3%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate14.2%—
MMLU—74.4%

Multimodal Not comparable

Kimi K2.5: 41.1 (#39), Qwen1.5-32B: —

BenchmarkKimi K2.5Qwen1.5-32B
LMArena Vision1269—
LMArena Document1430—

Multilingual Kimi K2.5 leads

Kimi K2.5: 53.9 (#53), Qwen1.5-32B: 31.4 (#259)

BenchmarkKimi K2.5Qwen1.5-32B
LMArena Non-English14331106
LMArena Chinese14951177
LMArena French14541101
LMArena German14411058
LMArena Japanese14211027
LMArena Korean14101008
LMArena Russian14351073
LMArena Spanish14501089

Instruction Following Kimi K2.5 leads

Kimi K2.5: 75.3 (#64), Qwen1.5-32B: 57.7 (#265)

BenchmarkKimi K2.5Qwen1.5-32B
LMArena Instruction Following14311116

Long Context Kimi K2.5 leads

Kimi K2.5: 52.1 (#7), Qwen1.5-32B: 34.7 (#246)

BenchmarkKimi K2.5Qwen1.5-32B
LMArena Longer Query14451146
Fiction.LiveBench86.1%—
CL-bench19.3%—
CL-bench Life13.2%—

Writing & Preference Kimi K2.5 leads

Kimi K2.5: 65.1 (#53), Qwen1.5-32B: 34.2 (#271)

BenchmarkKimi K2.5Qwen1.5-32B
LMArena Text14451137
LMArena Creative Writing14231083
LMArena Multi-Turn14441140
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1579—

Frequently asked questions

Is Kimi K2.5 better than Qwen1.5-32B?

Kimi K2.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.1 to 30.5 on the Noometry Index.

Is Kimi K2.5 or Qwen1.5-32B better for coding?

Kimi K2.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 48.8 versus 31.7 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Kimi K2.5 and Qwen1.5-32B share?

18 benchmarks have published results for both models. Kimi K2.5 has 51 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-32B has 21.

Related comparisons

Go deeper