Model comparison
Kimi K2.7 Code vs Qwen3.6 27B
Kimi K2.7 Code is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.3 to 42.2 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 7 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 7 benchmarks with published results for both. Kimi K2.7 Code scores higher in 4 categories and Qwen3.6 27B in 0 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Kimi K2.7 Code leads 39.0 to 25.0.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3): 54% for Kimi K2.7 Code 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 K2.7 Code.
Side by side
| Kimi K2.7 Code | Qwen3.6 27B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Moonshot AI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 43.3 | 42.2 |
| Released | 2026-06-12 | 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 | 19 | 11 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Kimi K2.7 Code leads
Kimi K2.7 Code: 42.9 (#95), Qwen3.6 27B: 39.1 (#163)
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.7 Code | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 47.5% | 37.3% |
| DeepSWE | 30.5% | — |
| FrontierCode | 30.1% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1473 | — |
| WeirdML | 54.1% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 886.23 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Kimi K2.7 Code: 24.0 (#122), Qwen3.6 27B: —
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.7 Code | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 37.6% | — |
| GBAEval | 0.9% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 5,083 | — |
Reasoning Kimi K2.7 Code leads
Kimi K2.7 Code: 39.0 (#61), Qwen3.6 27B: 25.0 (#153)
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.7 Code | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 10% | 0.9% |
| Chess Puzzles | 21% | 22% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 149.97 | 146.5 |
| SimpleBench | 57.9% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 7% |
| DTBench | — | 78.1% |
| LMCA | — | 34.5% |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 48.8% | — |
Math Kimi K2.7 Code leads
Kimi K2.7 Code: 52.9 (#48), Qwen3.6 27B: 48.5 (#62)
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.7 Code | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 54% | 35.1% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 95.6% | 91.1% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 12.2% | — |
Knowledge Kimi K2.7 Code leads
Kimi K2.7 Code: 53.5 (#57), Qwen3.6 27B: 52.4 (#63)
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.7 Code | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 87.9% | 85.9% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 36.5% | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Kimi K2.7 Code: —, Qwen3.6 27B: 50.3 (#181)
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.7 Code | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| EQ-Bench 4 | — | 1026 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Kimi K2.7 Code better than Qwen3.6 27B?
Kimi K2.7 Code is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.3 to 42.2 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, Kimi K2.7 Code 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 K2.7 Code lists at $0.95 and $4.
Is Kimi K2.7 Code or Qwen3.6 27B better for coding?
Kimi K2.7 Code scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.9 versus 39.1 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Both accept 262K tokens.
How many benchmarks do Kimi K2.7 Code and Qwen3.6 27B share?
7 benchmarks have published results for both models. Kimi K2.7 Code has 19 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 27B has 11.