Model comparison
Kimi K2.7 Code vs Qwen Turbo
Kimi K2.7 Code is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.3 to 27.1 on the Noometry Index. Qwen Turbo costs 20× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Kimi K2.7 Code's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 2 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. Kimi K2.7 Code scores higher in 2 categories and Qwen Turbo in 0 categories; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Kimi K2.7 Code leads 52.9 to 15.3.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 95.6% for Kimi K2.7 Code and 6.1% for Qwen Turbo.
- Qwen Turbo is cheaper at $0.05 / $0.20 per million input/output tokens, against $0.95 / $4 for Kimi K2.7 Code.
- Qwen Turbo accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 262K.
- Kimi K2.7 Code has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Kimi K2.7 Code | Qwen Turbo | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Moonshot AI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 43.3 | 27.1 |
| Released | 2026-06-12 | 2024-11-01 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 262K | 1M |
| Max output | 262K | 16K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.95 | $0.05 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $4 | $0.20 |
| Results tracked | 19 | 3 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
Kimi K2.7 Code: 42.9 (#95), Qwen Turbo: —
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.7 Code | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| DeepSWE | 30.5% | — |
| FrontierCode | 30.1% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1473 | — |
| SciCode | 47.5% | — |
| WeirdML | 54.1% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 886.23 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Kimi K2.7 Code: 24.0 (#122), Qwen Turbo: —
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.7 Code | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 37.6% | — |
| GBAEval | 0.9% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 5,083 | — |
Reasoning Not comparable
Kimi K2.7 Code: 39.0 (#61), Qwen Turbo: —
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.7 Code | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| SimpleBench | 57.9% | — |
| CritPt | 10% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 21% | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 48.8% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 149.97 | — |
Math Kimi K2.7 Code leads
Kimi K2.7 Code: 52.9 (#48), Qwen Turbo: 15.3 (#297)
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.7 Code | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 95.6% | 6.1% |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 54% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 12.2% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 56.2% |
Knowledge Kimi K2.7 Code leads
Kimi K2.7 Code: 53.5 (#57), Qwen Turbo: 22.2 (#272)
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.7 Code | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 87.9% | 41.8% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 36.5% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Kimi K2.7 Code better than Qwen Turbo?
Kimi K2.7 Code is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.3 to 27.1 on the Noometry Index. Qwen Turbo costs 20× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Kimi K2.7 Code's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Kimi K2.7 Code or Qwen Turbo?
Qwen Turbo is cheaper. It lists at $0.05 per million input tokens and $0.20 per million output tokens; Kimi K2.7 Code lists at $0.95 and $4.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen Turbo does, with 1M tokens against 262K.
How many benchmarks do Kimi K2.7 Code and Qwen Turbo share?
2 benchmarks have published results for both models. Kimi K2.7 Code has 19 scored results on Noometry and Qwen Turbo has 3.