Noometry

Model comparison

Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo vs QwQ-32B

Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.4 to 39.4 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 20 shared benchmarks.

Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo Moonshot AI

45.4

Rank #63 Confirmed

QwQ-32B Alibaba (Qwen)

39.4

Rank #153 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 20 benchmarks with published results for both. Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo scores higher in 7 categories and QwQ-32B in 1 category; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo leads 50.9 to 37.2.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 83.1% for Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo and 59.2% for QwQ-32B.

Side by side

Kimi K2 Thinking TurboQwQ-32B
ProviderMoonshot AIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index45.439.4
Released2025-11-062024-11-28
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window——
Max output——
Input $ / M tokens——
Output $ / M tokens——
Results tracked2136

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: 38.1 (#166), QwQ-32B: 34.9 (#220)

BenchmarkKimi K2 Thinking TurboQwQ-32B
LMArena Coding14541333
Aider Polyglot—20.9%
LMArena WebDev1322—
BigCodeBench Instruct—44.6%
LiveBench Coding—72.2%
BigCodeBench Complete—54.4%

Reasoning Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo leads

Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 31.4 (#72), QwQ-32B: 22.9 (#171)

BenchmarkKimi K2 Thinking TurboQwQ-32B
Chess Puzzles20%5%
LMArena Hard Prompts14281326
LiveBench Reasoning—83.5%
LiveBench Data Analysis—65%
Epoch Capabilities Index—137.6
ForecastBench—58.3
LiveBench—72%

Math Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo leads

Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 45.5 (#62), QwQ-32B: 36.2 (#123)

BenchmarkKimi K2 Thinking TurboQwQ-32B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202583.1%59.2%
LMArena Math14291359
LiveBench Math—77.8%

Knowledge Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo leads

Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 50.9 (#64), QwQ-32B: 37.2 (#150)

BenchmarkKimi K2 Thinking TurboQwQ-32B
GPQA Diamond84.2%65.3%
LMArena Expert14391323
Confabulations—15.6%

Multilingual Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo leads

Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 51.6 (#104), QwQ-32B: 45.0 (#171)

BenchmarkKimi K2 Thinking TurboQwQ-32B
LMArena Non-English13981306
LMArena Chinese14571378
LMArena French14251337
LMArena German13901313
LMArena Japanese13561263
LMArena Korean13291278
LMArena Russian13901297
LMArena Spanish14071353

Instruction Following Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo leads

Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 74.2 (#103), QwQ-32B: 72.8 (#131)

BenchmarkKimi K2 Thinking TurboQwQ-32B
LMArena Instruction Following14031297
LiveBench Instruction Following—81.8%

Long Context QwQ-32B leads

Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 43.2 (#99), QwQ-32B: 49.0 (#11)

BenchmarkKimi K2 Thinking TurboQwQ-32B
LMArena Longer Query14151308
Fiction.LiveBench—83.3%

Writing & Preference Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo leads

Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo: 60.2 (#99), QwQ-32B: 50.9 (#175)

BenchmarkKimi K2 Thinking TurboQwQ-32B
LMArena Text14151329
LMArena Creative Writing13731288
LMArena Multi-Turn14141314
Short-Story Creative Writing—80.2%
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—1257
LiveBench Language—51.4%

Frequently asked questions

Is Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo better than QwQ-32B?

Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.4 to 39.4 on the Noometry Index.

Is Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo or QwQ-32B better for coding?

Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.1 versus 34.9 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo and QwQ-32B share?

20 benchmarks have published results for both models. Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo has 21 scored results on Noometry and QwQ-32B has 36.

Related comparisons

Go deeper