Model comparison

Kimi K2.5 vs Qwen3 14B

Kimi K2.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.1 to 35.5 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 9 shared benchmarks.

Kimi K2.5 Moonshot AI

48.1

Rank #57 Confirmed

Qwen3 14B Alibaba (Qwen)

35.5

Rank #225 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 9 benchmarks with published results for both. Kimi K2.5 scores higher in 6 categories and Qwen3 14B in 0 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Kimi K2.5 leads 53.6 to 39.3.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is Kagi LLM Benchmark: 78.5% for Kimi K2.5 and 49.1% for Qwen3 14B.
  • Qwen3 14B is cheaper at $0.35 / $1.40 per million input/output tokens, against $0.45 / $2.25 for Kimi K2.5.
  • Kimi K2.5 accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 131K.

Side by side

Kimi K2.5 and Qwen3 14B specifications
Kimi K2.5Qwen3 14B
ProviderMoonshot AIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index48.135.5
Released2026-01-272025-04
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window262K131K
Max output262K8K
Input $ / M tokens$0.45$0.35
Output $ / M tokens$2.25$1.40
Results tracked5112

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), Qwen3 14B: 37.3 (#195)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkKimi K2.5Qwen3 14B
SciCode49%31.6%
SWE-bench Verified73.8%—
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)70.8%—
LMArena WebDev1437—
SWE-bench Multilingual67.3%—
WeirdML45.6%—
LMArena Coding1474—
ALE-Bench821.65—

Agentic & Tool Use Kimi K2.5 leads

Kimi K2.5: 34.2 (#48), Qwen3 14B: 29.6 (#83)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkKimi K2.5Qwen3 14B
Terminal-Bench43.2%—
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—41%
OSWorld63.3%—
Vending-Bench 21,198—

Reasoning Kimi K2.5 leads

Kimi K2.5: 31.2 (#80), Qwen3 14B: 18.5 (#280)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkKimi K2.5Qwen3 14B
Kagi LLM Benchmark78.5%49.1%
CritPt3.1%0%
Chess Puzzles12%4%
Epoch Capabilities Index148.03138.23
ARC-AGI-211.8%—
SimpleBench46.8%—
NYT Connections (extended)69.9%—
ARC-AGI-165.3%—
EnigmaEval3.4%—
Thematic Generalization69.4%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1453—
DTBench—64%
LMCA—18.2%

Math Kimi K2.5 leads

Kimi K2.5: 51.8 (#53), Qwen3 14B: 38.6 (#133)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkKimi K2.5Qwen3 14B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202592.2%66.4%
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions62.3%—
LMArena Math1470—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)27.9%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)4.2%—

Knowledge Kimi K2.5 leads

Kimi K2.5: 53.6 (#56), Qwen3 14B: 39.3 (#134)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkKimi K2.5Qwen3 14B
GPQA Diamond87.6%63.8%
Vectara Hallucination Rate14.2%5.4%
Humanity's Last Exam24.4%—
SimpleQA Verified34.3%—
LMArena Expert1466—

Multimodal Not comparable

Kimi K2.5: 41.1 (#39), Qwen3 14B: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkKimi K2.5Qwen3 14B
LMArena Vision1269—
LMArena Document1430—

Multilingual Not comparable

Kimi K2.5: 53.9 (#53), Qwen3 14B: —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkKimi K2.5Qwen3 14B
LMArena Non-English1433—
LMArena Chinese1495—
LMArena French1454—
LMArena German1441—
LMArena Japanese1421—
LMArena Korean1410—
LMArena Russian1435—
LMArena Spanish1450—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Kimi K2.5: 75.3 (#64), Qwen3 14B: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkKimi K2.5Qwen3 14B
LMArena Instruction Following1431—

Long Context Kimi K2.5 leads

Kimi K2.5: 52.1 (#7), Qwen3 14B: 38.1 (#204)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkKimi K2.5Qwen3 14B
Fiction.LiveBench86.1%62.5%
CL-bench19.3%—
CL-bench Life13.2%—
LMArena Longer Query1445—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Kimi K2.5: 65.1 (#53), Qwen3 14B: —

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkKimi K2.5Qwen3 14B
LMArena Text1445—
LMArena Creative Writing1423—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1579—
LMArena Multi-Turn1444—

Frequently asked questions

Is Kimi K2.5 better than Qwen3 14B?

Kimi K2.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.1 to 35.5 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, Kimi K2.5 or Qwen3 14B?

Qwen3 14B is cheaper. It lists at $0.35 per million input tokens and $1.40 per million output tokens; Kimi K2.5 lists at $0.45 and $2.25.

Is Kimi K2.5 or Qwen3 14B better for coding?

Kimi K2.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 48.8 versus 37.3 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Kimi K2.5 does, with 262K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks do Kimi K2.5 and Qwen3 14B share?

9 benchmarks have published results for both models. Kimi K2.5 has 51 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 14B has 12.

Related comparisons

Go deeper