Kimi K2.6
VS
Qwen3.7 Max
Kimi K2.6 vs Qwen3.7 Max: which wins at real work?
22 task areas · same graded test runs · rank comparison only, so 0–100 and Elo collections never mix raw scores.
Kimi K2.6 wins 12 of 22 task areas we tested; Qwen3.7 Max takes 10. Kimi K2.6 costs 1.2× less per token ($4.07 vs $5 per 1M).
Kimi K2.6 costs 1.2× less per token ($4.07 vs $5 per 1M).
Task by task
| Task area | Kimi K2.6 | Qwen3.7 Max | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Product & Project Management |
#53
/ 110
Strong
|
#7
/ 110
Excellent
|
Qwen3.7 Max |
| Chef / Home Cooking |
#7
/ 126
Strong
|
#47
/ 126
Usable
|
Kimi K2.6 |
| Research & Competitive Analysis |
#19
/ 110
Excellent
|
#58
/ 110
Usable
|
Kimi K2.6 |
| Training & Education |
#45
/ 110
Excellent
|
#13
/ 110
Excellent
|
Qwen3.7 Max |
| Legal & HR |
#22
/ 110
Excellent
|
#46
/ 110
Excellent
|
Kimi K2.6 |
| Translation & Localization |
#22
/ 110
Excellent
|
#1
/ 110
Excellent
|
Qwen3.7 Max |
| Investor & Pitch |
#1
/ 66
Strong
|
#19
/ 66
Strong
|
Kimi K2.6 |
| AI Strategy |
#19
/ 126
Strong
|
#36
/ 126
Strong
|
Kimi K2.6 |
| RAG, Safety & Grounding |
#18
/ 113
Excellent
|
#1
/ 113
Excellent
|
Qwen3.7 Max |
| Coding |
#5
/ 115
Excellent
|
#19
/ 115
Excellent
|
Kimi K2.6 |
| Content & Brand |
#22
/ 124
Strong
|
#10
/ 124
Strong
|
Qwen3.7 Max |
| Knowledge & Docs |
#22
/ 110
Strong
|
#34
/ 110
Strong
|
Kimi K2.6 |
| Structured Output |
#14
/ 113
Excellent
|
#2
/ 113
Excellent
|
Qwen3.7 Max |
| Landing Pages |
#21
/ 72
Strong
|
#10
/ 72
Strong
|
Qwen3.7 Max |
| Sales |
#15
/ 110
Strong
|
#24
/ 110
Strong
|
Kimi K2.6 |
| Summarization & Meeting Notes |
#3
/ 110
Excellent
|
#12
/ 110
Excellent
|
Kimi K2.6 |
| Data & Analytics |
#23
/ 110
Excellent
|
#15
/ 110
Excellent
|
Qwen3.7 Max |
| Customer Support |
#4
/ 113
Strong
|
#11
/ 113
Strong
|
Kimi K2.6 |
| Presentations & Decks |
#2
/ 110
Excellent
|
#9
/ 110
Excellent
|
Kimi K2.6 |
| Frontend & Landing Pages |
#8
/ 109
Usable
|
#14
/ 109
Needs editing
|
Kimi K2.6 |
| Creative & Comedy | #11 / 110 | #9 / 110 | Qwen3.7 Max |
| Executive Assistant |
#8
/ 112
Strong
|
#7
/ 112
Strong
|
Qwen3.7 Max |
Rank = position among every model config we tested in that task area (lower is better). Sorted by biggest gap first.
Same task, both models — judged
Both models answered the same test case; an independent judge graded each. Quotes are the judge's actual rationale.
Research & Competitive Analysis
Fair teardown vs incumbent (Northwind) (Competitive Teardown)
“The model perfectly adheres to the strict constraints of the prompt. Given that no specific source texts were provided, it correctly abstains from inventing facts about Northwind, explicitly marking them as unavailable. It rigorously separates fact from inference using a symmetric table structure, credits the generic incumbent's genuine strengths (workflow embeddedness, zero procurement friction), and avoids fabricating any competitor metrics like pricing or churn. The synthesis is highly actionable and well-calibrated.”
“The model completely failed to abstain and fabricated factual claims about the company without any source material, resulting in severe grounding violations.”
Frequently asked
Is Kimi K2.6 better than Qwen3.7 Max?
Across 22 task areas we benchmarked, Kimi K2.6 ranks higher in 12 and Qwen3.7 Max in 10.
Which is cheaper, Kimi K2.6 or Qwen3.7 Max?
Kimi K2.6 costs 1.2× less per token ($4.07 vs $5 per 1M).
What is Kimi K2.6 better at?
Kimi K2.6 out-ranks Qwen3.7 Max at Chef / Home Cooking, Research & Competitive Analysis, Legal & HR.
What is Qwen3.7 Max better at?
Qwen3.7 Max out-ranks Kimi K2.6 at Product & Project Management, Training & Education, Translation & Localization.
More comparisons
This page is Spring Prompt, running in public
We just did this for every model. Do it for your prompt.
The rankings above come from running real tasks through real models and scoring every output. Spring Prompt is that same engine — pointed at your prompt, your test cases, and your definition of good.
- Generate test cases from your prompt — no eval set required to start.
- Compare models side by side with quality, cost and latency in one matrix.
- Optimise the winner until the scores say it's ready to ship.
Prompt × model results
12 test cases · 3 evals