Model comparison
Kimi K2.6 vs Qwen2.5 Plus 1127
Kimi K2.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.7 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 14 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 14 benchmarks with published results for both. Kimi K2.6 scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Kimi K2.6 leads 57.0 to 36.1.
- Kimi K2.6 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Kimi K2.6 | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Moonshot AI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 47.7 | 38.8 |
| Released | 2026-04-20 | — |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 262K | — |
| Max output | 262K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.95 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $4 | — |
| Results tracked | 51 | 14 |
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), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 38.5 (#175)
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.6 | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1488 | 1314 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 76.7% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1509 | — |
| SciCode | 53.5% | — |
| WeirdML | 55.9% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 1,093 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Kimi K2.6: 21.9 (#137), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: —
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.6 | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| OSWorld 2.0 | 4.6% | — |
| ExploitBench | 18.4% | — |
| GBAEval | 0.9% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 12% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 6,205 | — |
Reasoning Kimi K2.6 leads
Kimi K2.6: 40.5 (#55), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 25.9 (#141)
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.6 | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1470 | 1299 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 87.2% | — |
| CritPt | 8% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 26% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 2.4% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 18% | — |
| DTBench | 90.9% | — |
| LMCA | 37.3% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 151.05 | — |
Math Kimi K2.6 leads
Kimi K2.6: 57.0 (#41), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 36.1 (#174)
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.6 | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1475 | 1298 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 57.2% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 25.6% | — |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 72.9% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 96.1% | — |
| ProofBench | 16% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 39% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 14.6% | — |
Knowledge Kimi K2.6 leads
Kimi K2.6: 54.0 (#54), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 35.5 (#183)
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.6 | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1491 | 1289 |
| GPQA Diamond | 90.8% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 34.9% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 10.8% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Kimi K2.6: 31.6 (#103), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: —
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.6 | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1283 | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 3.9% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 21.7% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1451 | — |
Multilingual Kimi K2.6 leads
Kimi K2.6: 54.9 (#37), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 41.9 (#201)
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.6 | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1446 | 1265 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1521 | 1314 |
| LMArena German | 1450 | 1231 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1443 | 1207 |
| LMArena Russian | 1446 | 1271 |
| LMArena French | 1471 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1427 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1464 | — |
Instruction Following Kimi K2.6 leads
Kimi K2.6: 76.3 (#43), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 67.2 (#199)
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.6 | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1451 | 1275 |
Long Context Kimi K2.6 leads
Kimi K2.6: 44.9 (#52), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 39.2 (#184)
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.6 | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1468 | 1292 |
Writing & Preference Kimi K2.6 leads
Kimi K2.6: 68.5 (#26), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 49.4 (#192)
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.6 | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1455 | 1299 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1434 | 1262 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1453 | 1299 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1725 | — |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1202 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Kimi K2.6 better than Qwen2.5 Plus 1127?
Kimi K2.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.7 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index.
Is Kimi K2.6 or Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 better for coding?
Kimi K2.6 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 50.7 versus 38.5 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Kimi K2.6 and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 share?
14 benchmarks have published results for both models. Kimi K2.6 has 51 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 has 14.