Compare / Qwen3.5-Flash vs Kimi K2.5

Qwen3.5-Flash vs Kimi K2.5

Which is cheaper, which is more capable, and which does better at each kind of work, from 17 results on 5 sources that measured both models.

AlibabaQwen3.5-Flash $0.065 in · $0.26 out
Moonshot AIKimi K2.5 Released 27 Jan 2026 · $0.57 in · $2.85 out
Qwen3.5-Flash wins 2Kimi K2.5 wins 15

Of the 17 results both models have, the better value on each. Results whose reported ranges overlap are too close to call.

Results as of 9 October 2026 (catalogue release 2026-10-09-dd620e778ac5). See also Alibaba vs Moonshot AI, every model from both labs.

Qwen3.5-Flash or Kimi K2.5? The short answer

They score about the same, so pick Qwen3.5-Flash: it costs 10 times less per token.

  • Qwen3.5-Flash is cheaper: $0.11 against $1.14 per million tokens, 10 times less.
  • On third-party benchmarks, on the results both models have: Kimi K2.5 does better for agents and tool use, writing and sticking to the facts.

Head to head

$0.11
Price per million tokens, blendedlower is better
$1.14
1,000,000
Context window, tokens
262,144

Every fact side by side

Qwen3.5-FlashKimi K2.5
Price per million tokens$0.065 in · $0.26 out$0.57 in · $2.85 out
Blended (3 in : 1 out)$0.11$1.14
Cheapest host, blended–$0.90 (SiliconFlow, INT4)
Intelligence Index–23.5
Spring Prompt overall––
Output speed, tokens a second––
Context window1,000,000 tokens262,144 tokens
Released–27 Jan 2026
WeightsClosedOpen
Developer based inChinaChina

Prices are the developer's list price where we have read it, otherwise the typical host on OpenRouter; see every model's price. Intelligence and speed from Artificial Analysis.

Which is better for what

Each model's rank among the models on sale today, for each kind of work, from our own benchmarks and licensed sources. Further right is better; the better rank is in green.

Agents and tool useMulti-step tasks with tools: support desks, coding agents, function calls 143 of 164 89 of 164
Reasoning and knowledgeHard questions across science, maths and general knowledge not measured 69 of 198
WritingWhat people prefer in blind comparisons, and judged writing quality 115 of 188 47 of 188
Sticking to the factsSummarising without inventing things, and factual answers 119 of 152 107 of 152

Every shared result

Each model's best result on every measure both have, grouped by benchmark, with the setting that produced it. Under each measure, every model that benchmark has measured is a grey tick, best to the right, so you can see where the two sit in the field. The headline measures of each benchmark come first; the rest are under "Show all". Green marks the better value; where a source reports ranges that overlap, neither is marked.

MeasureQwen3.5-FlashKimi K2.5
Arena (formerly LMArena) reported by Arena (formerly LMArena) · 3 results
Overall · TextArena rating, higher is better 142 · 67 of 387 measured 1,396 1,450thinking reasoning
Overall · Text factualityArena rating, higher is better 123 · 69 of 163 measured 1,414 1,445thinking reasoning
Business, management and finance · TextArena rating, higher is better 137 · 86 of 380 measured 1,403 1,440thinking reasoning
OpenHands Index reported by OpenHands Index · 3 results
Average% resolved, higher is better 30 · 18 of 34 measured 38.1%openhands 49.2%openhands
Front end (SWE-Bench Multimodal)% resolved, higher is better 24 · 18 of 34 measured 27.9%openhands 32.8%openhands
Greenfield (Commit0)% resolved, higher is better 25 · 21 of 34 measured 12.5%openhands 18.8%openhands
SimpleQA Verified (Epoch AI) reported by SimpleQA Verified (Epoch AI) · 1 result
Correct answers% of questions, higher is better 64 · 50 of 76 measured 20.3% 34.3%
Vectara Hallucination Leaderboard reported by Vectara Hallucination Leaderboard · 2 results
Hallucination rate · Vectara% of summaries, lower is better 62 · 88 of 104 measured 10.5% 14.2%
Answer rate · Vectara% of documents, higher is better 31 · 97 of 104 measured 99.8% 92.2%
Vending-Bench 2 reported by Vending-Bench 2 · 1 result
Money after a yearUS dollars, higher is better 48 · 42 of 58 measured $462.69 $1,198
Show all 17 results (7 more)
MeasureQwen3.5-FlashKimi K2.5
Arena (formerly LMArena) reported by Arena (formerly LMArena) · 4 results
Creative writing · TextArena rating, higher is better 167 · 67 of 385 measured 1,337 1,423thinking reasoning
Expert prompts · TextArena rating, higher is better 135 · 58 of 338 measured 1,419 1,483thinking reasoning
Instruction following · TextArena rating, higher is better 148 · 69 of 387 measured 1,381 1,439thinking reasoning
Writing, literature and language · TextArena rating, higher is better 149 · 70 of 386 measured 1,367 1,428thinking reasoning
OpenHands Index reported by OpenHands Index · 3 results
Information gathering (GAIA)% resolved, higher is better 23 · 17 of 34 measured 49.7%openhands 63.6%openhands
Issue resolution (SWE-Bench)% resolved, higher is better 31 · 27 of 34 measured 62.0%openhands 68.8%openhands
Testing (SWT-Bench)% resolved, higher is better 31 · 22 of 34 measured 38.3%openhands 61.9%openhands

Quick answers

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

They score about the same, so pick Qwen3.5-Flash: it costs 10 times less per token.

Which is cheaper, Qwen3.5-Flash or Kimi K2.5?

Qwen3.5-Flash is cheaper: $0.11 against $1.14 per million tokens, 10 times less.

Which is better for agents and tool use, Qwen3.5-Flash or Kimi K2.5?

Kimi K2.5 ranks 89 of 164 models on sale for multi-step tasks with tools: support desks, coding agents, function calls, against 143 for Qwen3.5-Flash.

Which is better for writing, Qwen3.5-Flash or Kimi K2.5?

Kimi K2.5 ranks 47 of 188 models on sale for what people prefer in blind comparisons, and judged writing quality, against 115 for Qwen3.5-Flash.

Which is better for sticking to the facts, Qwen3.5-Flash or Kimi K2.5?

Kimi K2.5 ranks 107 of 152 models on sale for summarising without inventing things, and factual answers, against 119 for Qwen3.5-Flash.

Which has the bigger context window, Qwen3.5-Flash or Kimi K2.5?

Qwen3.5-Flash: 1,000,000 tokens, against 262,144 for Kimi K2.5.

Run Qwen3.5-Flash and Kimi K2.5 on your own prompt

Benchmarks aren't your data. Try both side by side in the playground, with the cost of every answer.