Noometry

Model comparison

Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo vs Qwen3-1.7B

Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.8 to 26.6 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 3 shared benchmarks.

Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo Moonshot AI

45.8

Rank #70 Confirmed

Qwen3-1.7B Alibaba (Qwen)

26.6

Rank #336 Reported

Summary

  • They share 3 benchmarks with published results for both. Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo scores higher in 3 categories and Qwen3-1.7B in 0 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo leads 50.9 to 19.6.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 83.1% for Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo and 8.1% for Qwen3-1.7B.

Side by side

Kimi K2 Thinking TurboQwen3-1.7B
ProviderMoonshot AIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index45.826.6
Released2025-11-062025-04-29
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window——
Max output——
Input $ / M tokens——
Output $ / M tokens——
Results tracked214

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 38.4 (#178), Qwen3-1.7B: —

BenchmarkKimi K2 Thinking TurboQwen3-1.7B
LMArena WebDev1322—
LMArena Coding1454—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: —, Qwen3-1.7B: 24.7 (#115)

BenchmarkKimi K2 Thinking TurboQwen3-1.7B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—28.4%

Reasoning Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo leads

Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 32.5 (#75), Qwen3-1.7B: 19.2 (#267)

BenchmarkKimi K2 Thinking TurboQwen3-1.7B
Chess Puzzles20%0%
LMArena Hard Prompts1428—

Math Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo leads

Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 47.4 (#68), Qwen3-1.7B: 16.3 (#294)

BenchmarkKimi K2 Thinking TurboQwen3-1.7B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202583.1%8.1%
LMArena Math1429—

Knowledge Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo leads

Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 50.9 (#69), Qwen3-1.7B: 19.6 (#278)

BenchmarkKimi K2 Thinking TurboQwen3-1.7B
GPQA Diamond84.2%38%
LMArena Expert1439—

Multilingual Not comparable

Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 51.4 (#109), Qwen3-1.7B: —

BenchmarkKimi K2 Thinking TurboQwen3-1.7B
LMArena Non-English1398—
LMArena Chinese1456—
LMArena French1425—
LMArena German1390—
LMArena Japanese1357—
LMArena Korean1330—
LMArena Russian1391—
LMArena Spanish1406—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 74.0 (#109), Qwen3-1.7B: —

BenchmarkKimi K2 Thinking TurboQwen3-1.7B
LMArena Instruction Following1403—

Long Context Not comparable

Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 43.2 (#102), Qwen3-1.7B: —

BenchmarkKimi K2 Thinking TurboQwen3-1.7B
LMArena Longer Query1415—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 60.0 (#104), Qwen3-1.7B: —

BenchmarkKimi K2 Thinking TurboQwen3-1.7B
LMArena Text1415—
LMArena Creative Writing1374—
LMArena Multi-Turn1414—

Frequently asked questions

Is Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo better than Qwen3-1.7B?

Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.8 to 26.6 on the Noometry Index.

How many benchmarks do Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo and Qwen3-1.7B share?

3 benchmarks have published results for both models. Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo has 21 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3-1.7B has 4.

Related comparisons

Go deeper