Model comparison
Kimi K2.6 vs Qwen3.6 27B
Kimi K2.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.7 to 42.2 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 11 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. Kimi K2.6 scores higher in 5 categories and Qwen3.6 27B in 0 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Kimi K2.6 leads 68.5 to 50.3.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3): 57.2% for Kimi K2.6 and 35.1% for Qwen3.6 27B.
- Qwen3.6 27B is cheaper at $0.60 / $3.60 per million input/output tokens, against $0.95 / $4 for Kimi K2.6.
Side by side
| Kimi K2.6 | Qwen3.6 27B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Moonshot AI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 47.7 | 42.2 |
| Released | 2026-04-20 | 2026-04-22 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 262K | 262K |
| Max output | 262K | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.95 | $0.60 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $4 | $3.60 |
| Results tracked | 51 | 11 |
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), Qwen3.6 27B: 39.1 (#163)
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.6 | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 53.5% | 37.3% |
| SWE-bench Verified | 76.7% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1509 | — |
| WeirdML | 55.9% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1488 | — |
| ALE-Bench | 1,093 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Kimi K2.6: 21.9 (#137), Qwen3.6 27B: —
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.6 | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| 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), Qwen3.6 27B: 25.0 (#153)
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.6 | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 8% | 0.9% |
| Chess Puzzles | 26% | 22% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 18% | 7% |
| DTBench | 90.9% | 78.1% |
| LMCA | 37.3% | 34.5% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 151.05 | 146.5 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 87.2% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 2.4% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1470 | — |
Math Kimi K2.6 leads
Kimi K2.6: 57.0 (#41), Qwen3.6 27B: 48.5 (#62)
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.6 | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 57.2% | 35.1% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 96.1% | 91.1% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 25.6% | — |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 72.9% | — |
| ProofBench | 16% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1475 | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 39% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 14.6% | — |
Knowledge Kimi K2.6 leads
Kimi K2.6: 54.0 (#54), Qwen3.6 27B: 52.4 (#63)
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.6 | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 90.8% | 85.9% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 34.9% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 10.8% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1491 | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Kimi K2.6: 31.6 (#103), Qwen3.6 27B: —
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.6 | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1283 | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 3.9% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 21.7% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1451 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Kimi K2.6: 54.9 (#37), Qwen3.6 27B: —
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.6 | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1446 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1521 | — |
| LMArena French | 1471 | — |
| LMArena German | 1450 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1443 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1427 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1446 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1464 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Kimi K2.6: 76.3 (#43), Qwen3.6 27B: —
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.6 | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1451 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Kimi K2.6: 44.9 (#52), Qwen3.6 27B: —
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.6 | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1468 | — |
Writing & Preference Kimi K2.6 leads
Kimi K2.6: 68.5 (#26), Qwen3.6 27B: 50.3 (#181)
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.6 | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1202 | 1026 |
| LMArena Text | 1455 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1434 | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1725 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1453 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Kimi K2.6 better than Qwen3.6 27B?
Kimi K2.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.7 to 42.2 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, Kimi K2.6 or Qwen3.6 27B?
Qwen3.6 27B is cheaper. It lists at $0.60 per million input tokens and $3.60 per million output tokens; Kimi K2.6 lists at $0.95 and $4.
Is Kimi K2.6 or Qwen3.6 27B better for coding?
Kimi K2.6 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 50.7 versus 39.1 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Both accept 262K tokens.
How many benchmarks do Kimi K2.6 and Qwen3.6 27B share?
11 benchmarks have published results for both models. Kimi K2.6 has 51 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 27B has 11.