Make AI phone calls with one API call

Start for free

Model Comparison

Kimi K2.5 vs Qwen3.6-27B

Kimi K2.5 shows notably better performance in the majority of benchmarks.

Want to compare interactively?Try the playground

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

16 benchmarks

Kimi K2.5 outperforms in 11 benchmarks (HMMT 2025, Humanity's Last Exam, IMO-AnswerBench, LiveCodeBench v6, MathVista-Mini, MMLU-Pro, MMMU-Pro, OCRBench, SimpleVQA, SWE-bench Multilingual, VideoMMMU), while Qwen3.6-27B is better at 5 benchmarks (CharXiv-R, GPQA, SWE-Bench Pro, SWE-Bench Verified, Terminal-Bench 2.0).

Kimi K2.5 shows notably better performance in the majority of benchmarks.

Thu Apr 23 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

CallingBox

Done comparing? Ship the phone agent.

One API for outbound and inbound calls.

Start for freeRead the docs
$0.05 /min all-in7 lines of code

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Cost data unavailable.

Lowest available price from all providers
Thu Apr 23 2026 • llm-stats.com
Moonshot AI
Kimi K2.5
Input tokens$0.60
Output tokens$3.00
Best providerFireworks
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3.6-27B
Input tokens$0.00
Output tokens$0.00
Best providerUnknown Organization
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

972.2B diff

Kimi K2.5 has 972.2B more parameters than Qwen3.6-27B, making it 3499.5% larger.

Moonshot AI
Kimi K2.5
1000.0Bparameters
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3.6-27B
27.8Bparameters
1000.0B
Kimi K2.5
27.8B
Qwen3.6-27B

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Kimi K2.5 specifies input context (262,100 tokens). Only Kimi K2.5 specifies output context (262,100 tokens).

Moonshot AI
Kimi K2.5
Input262,100 tokens
Output262,100 tokens
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3.6-27B
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Thu Apr 23 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

Both Kimi K2.5 and Qwen3.6-27B support multimodal inputs.

They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.

Kimi K2.5

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Qwen3.6-27B

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Kimi K2.5 is licensed under MIT, while Qwen3.6-27B uses Apache 2.0.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

Kimi K2.5

MIT

Open weights

Qwen3.6-27B

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Kimi K2.5 was released on 2026-01-27, while Qwen3.6-27B was released on 2026-04-21.

Qwen3.6-27B is 3 months newer than Kimi K2.5.

Kimi K2.5

Jan 27, 2026

2 months ago

Qwen3.6-27B

Apr 21, 2026

2 days ago

2mo newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.

Unable to compare the recency of their training data.

No cutoff dates available

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Key Takeaways

Moonshot AI
Larger context window (262,100 tokens)
Higher HMMT 2025 score (95.4% vs 93.8%)
Higher Humanity's Last Exam score (50.2% vs 24.0%)
Higher IMO-AnswerBench score (81.8% vs 80.8%)
Higher LiveCodeBench v6 score (85.0% vs 83.9%)
Higher MathVista-Mini score (90.1% vs 87.4%)
Higher MMLU-Pro score (87.1% vs 86.2%)
Higher MMMU-Pro score (78.5% vs 75.8%)
Higher OCRBench score (92.3% vs 89.4%)
Higher SimpleVQA score (71.2% vs 56.1%)
Higher SWE-bench Multilingual score (73.0% vs 71.3%)
Higher VideoMMMU score (86.6% vs 84.4%)
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team

Qwen3.6-27B

View details

Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team

Higher CharXiv-R score (78.4% vs 77.5%)
Higher GPQA score (87.8% vs 87.6%)
Higher SWE-Bench Pro score (53.5% vs 50.7%)
Higher SWE-Bench Verified score (77.2% vs 76.8%)
Higher Terminal-Bench 2.0 score (59.3% vs 50.8%)

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
Moonshot AI
Kimi K2.5
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3.6-27B

FAQ

Common questions about Kimi K2.5 vs Qwen3.6-27B

Kimi K2.5 shows notably better performance in the majority of benchmarks. Kimi K2.5 is made by Moonshot AI and Qwen3.6-27B is made by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their benchmark scores, pricing, and capabilities above.
Kimi K2.5 scores AIME 2025: 96.1%, HMMT 2025: 95.4%, InfoVQAtest: 92.6%, OCRBench: 92.3%, MathVista-Mini: 90.1%. Qwen3.6-27B scores CountBench: 97.8%, VLMsAreBlind: 97.0%, V*: 94.7%, AIME 2026: 94.1%, HMMT 2025: 93.8%.
Kimi K2.5 supports 262K tokens and Qwen3.6-27B supports an unknown number of tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.
Key differences include licensing (MIT vs Apache 2.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.
Kimi K2.5 is developed by Moonshot AI and Qwen3.6-27B is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team.