Kimi K2.5vsQwen3-Coder-Next
Kimi K2.5 | Qwen3-Coder-Next | |
|---|---|---|
| Specifications | ||
ParametersA rough measure of how big the model is. More parameters usually means more capable and more expensive to run, though it is a poor guide on its own — a smaller, newer model often beats a larger, older one. | 1T | 80B |
Context windowHow much text the model can hold in mind at once — your question, any documents you attach, the conversation so far, and its own reply. Go past it and the earliest part falls out of view. | 256k | 256k |
| API pricingUSD per 1M tokens · lower wins · base tier | ||
Input priceWhat you pay for everything you send the model — your question, plus any documents or earlier conversation you include with it. | $0.60 | $0.30 |
Output priceWhat you pay for the text the model writes back. It is normally the dearer half: producing an answer costs more than reading one. | $3.00 | $1.50 |
Cached input priceA reduced rate for text you send over and over. If every request starts with the same instructions or the same document, the provider keeps a copy ready and charges less to read it again. | $0.10 | — |
Cheapest inputLowest input rate across third-party providers, excluding the lab itself. The cheapest endpoint may run a quantised build or a shorter context — see "Available from" on the model page. | $0.45SiliconFlow | $0.12Parasail |
Cheapest outputLowest output rate across third-party providers, excluding the lab itself. May come from a different provider than the cheapest input. | $2.25SiliconFlow | $0.80Parasail |
| Benchmarks | ||
SWE-Bench VerifiedCoding — Real coding tasks pulled from open-source projects — the AI has to find and fix actual bugs. A human-checked version of the original SWE-Bench. Higher is better. | 76.8% | 70.6% |
| BenchmarksPublished by one model only | ||
BullshitBench v2Nonsense detection — Given a confidently-worded but nonsensical prompt, does the AI spot that it makes no sense and push back — instead of playing along and inventing an answer? The score is how often it clearly called out the nonsense. Higher is better. | 52% | — |
SWE-Bench ProAgentic coding — Can the AI fix real bugs in real software? It's handed actual problems from open-source projects and has to write code that genuinely solves them. Higher is better. | — | 44.3% |
SWE-Bench MultilingualMultilingual coding — Like SWE-Bench, but the coding problems span many programming languages, not just one. Tests how broadly the AI can code. Higher is better. | — | 62.8% |
Next.js EvalsNext.js coding — Vercel's open eval of how well AI coding agents build and migrate real Next.js apps — measured as the share of tasks the agent completes successfully. Higher is better. | 16% | — |
LiveCodeBenchCompetitive coding — Coding problems published so recently the AI can't have seen them in training — a contamination-free test of raw programming skill. Higher is better. | 85% | — |
Terminal-Bench 2.0Agentic terminal coding — Can the AI work in a command-line terminal — running commands and finishing technical setup tasks the way a developer would? (Version 2.0 of the test.) Higher is better. | — | 36.2% |
BrowseCompWeb browsing — Can the AI browse the web and track down hard-to-find answers? Higher is better. | 60.6% | — |
Humanity's Last Exam · with toolsMultidisciplinary reasoning — Humanity's Last Exam — extremely hard expert questions across many subjects. “With tools” means the AI is allowed to search the web or run code while answering. Higher is better. | 30.1% | — |
GPQA DiamondScience — Graduate-level science questions in biology, physics, and chemistry — hard enough that subject-matter PhDs score around 65%. Higher is better. | 87.6% | — |
| Overview | ||
| Company | Moonshot AI | Qwen |
| Release date | Jan 27 2026 | Feb 3 2026 |
| Access | Open Weight | Open Weight |
Other comparisons
Kimi K2.5vsClaude Fable 5.1Qwen3-Coder-NextvsClaude Fable 5.1Kimi K2.5vsGPT-6 AstraQwen3-Coder-NextvsGPT-6 AstraKimi K2.5vsGemini 3.8 FlashQwen3-Coder-NextvsGemini 3.8 FlashKimi K2.5vsMuse Spark 1.3Qwen3-Coder-NextvsMuse Spark 1.3Kimi K2.5vsGrok 4.6Qwen3-Coder-NextvsGrok 4.6Kimi K2.5vsDeepSeek-V4.1-FlashQwen3-Coder-NextvsDeepSeek-V4.1-Flash
Frequently asked questions
Kimi K2.5 leads Qwen3-Coder-Next on 1 of the 1 benchmark they both report (SWE-Bench Verified). Qwen3-Coder-Next is cheaper on both input and output: $0.30 vs $0.60 per million input tokens, and $1.50 vs $3.00 per million output tokens. Figures are base-tier rates. Kimi K2.5 shipped 7 days before Qwen3-Coder-Next, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
Kimi K2.5 has 1T parameters, while Qwen3-Coder-Next has 80B. Context windows are 256k (Kimi K2.5) vs 256k (Qwen3-Coder-Next).
On SWE-Bench Verified, Kimi K2.5 leads at 76.8% vs Qwen3-Coder-Next at 70.6%.