Model comparison

Kimi K2.6 vs Qwen1.5-7B

Kimi K2.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.7 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.

Kimi K2.6 Moonshot AI

47.7

Rank #60 Confirmed

Qwen1.5-7B Alibaba (Qwen)

31.4

Rank #273 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Kimi K2.6 scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen1.5-7B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Kimi K2.6 leads 68.5 to 29.6.

Side by side

Kimi K2.6 and Qwen1.5-7B specifications
Kimi K2.6Qwen1.5-7B
ProviderMoonshot AIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index47.731.4
Released2026-04-202024-02-04
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window262K—
Max output262K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.95—
Output $ / M tokens$4—
Results tracked5113

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

Category by category

Coding Kimi K2.6 leads

Kimi K2.6: 50.7 (#43), Qwen1.5-7B: 32.2 (#276)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkKimi K2.6Qwen1.5-7B
LMArena Coding14881107
SWE-bench Verified76.7%—
LMArena WebDev1509—
SciCode53.5%—
WeirdML55.9%—
ALE-Bench1,093—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Kimi K2.6: 21.9 (#137), Qwen1.5-7B: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkKimi K2.6Qwen1.5-7B
OSWorld 2.04.6%—
ExploitBench18.4%—
GBAEval0.9%—
GDP.pdf12%—
Vending-Bench 26,205—

Reasoning Kimi K2.6 leads

Kimi K2.6: 40.5 (#55), Qwen1.5-7B: 20.4 (#240)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkKimi K2.6Qwen1.5-7B
LMArena Hard Prompts14701065
NYT Connections (extended)87.2%—
CritPt8%—
Chess Puzzles26%—
EBR-Bench2.4%—
Mystery Game Puzzles18%—
DTBench90.9%—
LMCA37.3%—
Epoch Capabilities Index151.05—

Math Kimi K2.6 leads

Kimi K2.6: 57.0 (#41), Qwen1.5-7B: 31.4 (#224)

Knowledge Kimi K2.6 leads

Kimi K2.6: 54.0 (#54), Qwen1.5-7B: 28.7 (#243)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkKimi K2.6Qwen1.5-7B
LMArena Expert14911055
GPQA Diamond90.8%—
SimpleQA Verified34.9%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate10.8%—
MMLU—62.6%

Multimodal Not comparable

Kimi K2.6: 31.6 (#103), Qwen1.5-7B: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkKimi K2.6Qwen1.5-7B
LMArena Vision1283—
Blueprint-Bench 23.9%—
Furniture Assembly21.7%—
LMArena Document1451—

Multilingual Kimi K2.6 leads

Kimi K2.6: 54.9 (#37), Qwen1.5-7B: 28.5 (#271)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkKimi K2.6Qwen1.5-7B
LMArena Non-English14461058
LMArena Chinese15211141
LMArena Russian14461006
LMArena French1471—
LMArena German1450—
LMArena Japanese1443—
LMArena Korean1427—
LMArena Spanish1464—

Instruction Following Kimi K2.6 leads

Kimi K2.6: 76.3 (#43), Qwen1.5-7B: 54.1 (#281)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkKimi K2.6Qwen1.5-7B
LMArena Instruction Following14511058

Long Context Kimi K2.6 leads

Kimi K2.6: 44.9 (#52), Qwen1.5-7B: 33.1 (#266)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkKimi K2.6Qwen1.5-7B
LMArena Longer Query14681090

Writing & Preference Kimi K2.6 leads

Kimi K2.6: 68.5 (#26), Qwen1.5-7B: 29.6 (#293)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkKimi K2.6Qwen1.5-7B
LMArena Text14551083
LMArena Creative Writing14341035
LMArena Multi-Turn14531062
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1725—
EQ-Bench 41202—

Frequently asked questions

Is Kimi K2.6 better than Qwen1.5-7B?

Kimi K2.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.7 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index.

Is Kimi K2.6 or Qwen1.5-7B better for coding?

Kimi K2.6 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 50.7 versus 32.2 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Kimi K2.6 and Qwen1.5-7B share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Kimi K2.6 has 51 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-7B has 13.

Related comparisons

Go deeper