Kimi K2.5vsQwen3.8-Max
Kimi K2.5 | Qwen3.8-Max | |
|---|---|---|
| Specifications | ||
Parameters | 1T | 2.4T |
Context window | 256k | 1M |
| Benchmarks | ||
Nonsense detection BullshitBench v2Given 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% | — |
Agentic coding SWE-Bench ProCan 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. | — | 67.7% |
Coding SWE-Bench VerifiedReal 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% | — |
Agentic coding CursorBench v3.1Cursor's own test of harder, real-world coding tasks inside a code editor. Higher is better. | 31.9% | — |
Research reproduction PaperBenchreproducing the results of an ML research paper end to end | — | 93% |
Next.js coding Next.js EvalsVercel'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. | 21% | — |
Competitive coding LiveCodeBenchCoding 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% | — |
Agentic terminal coding Terminal-Bench 2.1Can the AI work in a command-line terminal — running commands and finishing technical setup tasks the way a developer would? Higher is better. | — | 86.6% |
Professional tool use JobBenchTests the AI on professional workplace tasks that require using real work tools — the kind of multi-step jobs an office worker handles. Higher is better. | — | 53.4% |
Science GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions in biology, physics, and chemistry — hard enough that subject-matter PhDs score around 65%. Higher is better. | 87.6% | — |
Agentic computer use OSWorld-VerifiedCan the AI actually operate a computer — clicking, typing, and using real apps — to finish tasks on its own? Higher is better. | — | 86.1% |
Chart reasoning CharXiv ReasoningCan the AI read and reason about complex charts and figures, not just text? Higher is better. | — | 88.4% |
Visual reasoning BabyVisionTests core visual reasoning — seeing and understanding images the way even young children can, which AIs often find surprisingly hard. Higher is better. | — | 82% |
Community preference (code) Arena Elo (Code)Like the text arena, but people vote on which AI writes better code. The votes become a chess-style Elo rating on arena.ai. Higher is better. | 1433 | — |
| Overview | ||
| Company | Moonshot AI | Qwen |
| Release date | Jan 27 2026 | Aug 3 2026 |
| Access | Open Weight | Proprietary |
Which is better: Kimi K2.5 or Qwen3.8-Max?
Kimi K2.5 and Qwen3.8-Max don't publish scores on any of the same benchmarks, so there's no direct head-to-head comparison. Kimi K2.5 shipped 188 days before Qwen3.8-Max, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
Kimi K2.5 has 1T parameters, while Qwen3.8-Max has 2.4T. Context windows are 256k (Kimi K2.5) vs 1M (Qwen3.8-Max). Kimi K2.5 is open weight, while Qwen3.8-Max is proprietary.
Direct benchmark comparisons are unavailable — Kimi K2.5 and Qwen3.8-Max don't publish scores on any of the same benchmarks.
Frequently asked questions
Kimi K2.5 was released by Moonshot AI on Jan 27 2026.
Qwen3.8-Max was released by Qwen on Aug 3 2026.
Kimi K2.5 has a 256k context window; Qwen3.8-Max has 1M.
Kimi K2.5 is an open weight model released by Moonshot AI. Qwen3.8-Max is a proprietary model released by Qwen.