Model comparison
Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo vs Qwen2.5 32B Instruct
Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.8 to 30.1 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 3 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 3 benchmarks with published results for both. Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo scores higher in 3 categories and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct in 1 category; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo leads 47.4 to 16.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 83.1% for Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo and 7.4% for Qwen2.5 32B Instruct.
Side by side
| Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Moonshot AI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 45.8 | 30.1 |
| Released | 2025-11-06 | 2024-09 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | 131K |
| Max output | — | 8K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.70 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $2.80 |
| Results tracked | 21 | 7 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Too close to call
Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 38.4 (#178), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 38.7 (#169)
| Benchmark | Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1322 | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 45% |
| LMArena Coding | 1454 | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 52.3% |
Reasoning Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo leads
Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 32.5 (#75), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 19.2 (#266)
| Benchmark | Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 20% | 0% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1428 | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 128.52 |
Math Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo leads
Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 47.4 (#68), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 16.2 (#296)
| Benchmark | Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 83.1% | 7.4% |
| LMArena Math | 1429 | — |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 56.1% |
Knowledge Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo leads
Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 50.9 (#69), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 24.9 (#266)
| Benchmark | Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 84.2% | 46.1% |
| LMArena Expert | 1439 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 51.4 (#109), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1398 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1456 | — |
| LMArena French | 1425 | — |
| LMArena German | 1390 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1357 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1330 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1391 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1406 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 74.0 (#109), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1403 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 43.2 (#102), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1415 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 60.0 (#104), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1415 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1374 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1414 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo better than Qwen2.5 32B Instruct?
Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.8 to 30.1 on the Noometry Index.
Is Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo or Qwen2.5 32B Instruct better for coding?
They score almost the same on coding (38.4 vs 38.7); test both on your own repository before choosing.
How many benchmarks do Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct share?
3 benchmarks have published results for both models. Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo has 21 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct has 7.