Noometry

Model comparison

Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo vs Qwen3.5-Flash

Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.8 to 42.5 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 21 shared benchmarks.

Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo Moonshot AI

45.8

Rank #70 Confirmed

Qwen3.5-Flash Alibaba (Qwen)

42.5

Rank #112 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 21 benchmarks with published results for both. Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo scores higher in 7 categories and Qwen3.5-Flash in 1 category; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo leads 47.4 to 37.4.
  • Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Kimi K2 Thinking TurboQwen3.5-Flash
ProviderMoonshot AIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index45.842.5
Released2025-11-062026-02-23
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window—1M
Max output—66K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.10
Output $ / M tokens—$0.40
Results tracked2132

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

Category by category

Coding Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo leads

Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 38.4 (#178), Qwen3.5-Flash: 34.2 (#242)

BenchmarkKimi K2 Thinking TurboQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena WebDev13221244
LMArena Coding14541412
ALE-Bench—221.8

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: —, Qwen3.5-Flash: —

BenchmarkKimi K2 Thinking TurboQwen3.5-Flash
Vending-Bench 2—462.69

Reasoning Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 32.5 (#75), Qwen3.5-Flash: 33.7 (#72)

BenchmarkKimi K2 Thinking TurboQwen3.5-Flash
Chess Puzzles20%21%
LMArena Hard Prompts14281403
Mystery Game Puzzles—20%
DTBench—82.9%
LMCA—29.1%
Epoch Capabilities Index—143.98

Math Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo leads

Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 47.4 (#68), Qwen3.5-Flash: 37.4 (#158)

BenchmarkKimi K2 Thinking TurboQwen3.5-Flash
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202583.1%84.4%
LMArena Math14291407
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—18.2%
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)—6.2%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)—0%

Knowledge Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo leads

Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 50.9 (#69), Qwen3.5-Flash: 43.2 (#93)

BenchmarkKimi K2 Thinking TurboQwen3.5-Flash
GPQA Diamond84.2%82.3%
LMArena Expert14391407
SimpleQA Verified—20.3%
Vectara Hallucination Rate—10.5%

Multilingual Too close to call

Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 51.4 (#109), Qwen3.5-Flash: 50.5 (#121)

BenchmarkKimi K2 Thinking TurboQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Non-English13981385
LMArena Chinese14561446
LMArena French14251412
LMArena German13901390
LMArena Japanese13571368
LMArena Korean13301344
LMArena Russian13911379
LMArena Spanish14061400

Instruction Following Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo leads

Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 74.0 (#109), Qwen3.5-Flash: 72.6 (#139)

BenchmarkKimi K2 Thinking TurboQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Instruction Following14031374

Long Context Too close to call

Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 43.2 (#102), Qwen3.5-Flash: 42.4 (#124)

BenchmarkKimi K2 Thinking TurboQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Longer Query14151392

Writing & Preference Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo leads

Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 60.0 (#104), Qwen3.5-Flash: 57.9 (#122)

BenchmarkKimi K2 Thinking TurboQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Text14151397
LMArena Creative Writing13741343
LMArena Multi-Turn14141393

Frequently asked questions

Is Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo better than Qwen3.5-Flash?

Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.8 to 42.5 on the Noometry Index.

Is Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo or Qwen3.5-Flash better for coding?

Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.4 versus 34.2 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo and Qwen3.5-Flash share?

21 benchmarks have published results for both models. Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo has 21 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5-Flash has 32.

Related comparisons

Go deeper