Kimi K2.5 vs Qwen3.7 Flash
At a Glance
| Compare |  Kimi K2.5Moonshot AI |  Qwen3.7 FlashQwen |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing and Limits | ||
| Input priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | $0.45Deepinfra ↗ · Aug 29, 2026 | $0.030Openrouter ↗ · Sep 22, 2026 |
| Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | $2.25Deepinfra ↗ · Aug 29, 2026 | $0.13Openrouter ↗ · Sep 22, 2026 |
| Context windowMaximum documented tokens | 262K | 1,000K |
| Model facts checked | Aug 28, 2026View model evidence → | Sep 3, 2026View model evidence → |
Token prices are the lowest available sourced USD rates; input and output may use different providers. Cost ranking estimates output spend on LiveBench, not a full request bill. Ranking methodology →
Available Benchmarks
Side-by-Side Facts
| Field | Kimi-K2.5 | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Developer | Moonshot AI | Qwen |
| Family | Kimi K2 5 | Qwen3 7 |
| Model | Kimi-K2.5 | Qwen3.7 Flash |
| Version | Kimi-K2.5 | Qwen3.7 Flash |
| Lifecycle | active | active |
| Released | 2026-01-27 | 2026-07-15 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Unknown | Unknown |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image, Video |
| Output modalities | Text | Text |
| Context window | 262K | 1,000K |
| Total parameters | 1T | Unknown |
| Active parameters | 32B | Unknown |
| License | other | Unknown |
| Open weights | Yes | No |
| API available | Yes | Yes |
| Self-hostable | Yes | No |
| Provider access | Deepinfra (Standard), Hugging Face (Standard), Openrouter (Standard) | Alibaba Cloud Model Studio (Standard), Openrouter (Standard) |
| Capabilities | chat, generation, reasoning, tools | agents, chat, generation, reasoning, structured_outputs, tools, vision |
Kimi K2.5 Capabilities
Qwen3.7 Flash Capabilities
Related Comparisons
All image comparisons →| A | Pair | B | Context |
|---|---|---|---|
Kimi-K2.5Moonshot AI | vs |  GPT-6 AstraOpenAI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | vs | Kimi-K2.5Moonshot AI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
 Gemini 3.1 ProGoogle DeepMind | vs | Kimi-K2.5Moonshot AI | cross-developer peerstext |
 DeepSeek-V4.1-FlashDeepSeek | vs | Kimi-K2.5Moonshot AI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Kimi-K2.5Moonshot AI | vs | Grok 4.6xAI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Kimi-K2.5Moonshot AI | vs | Qwen3.8-MaxQwen | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Kimi-K2.5Moonshot AI | vs | Kimi-K3Moonshot AI | family variantsembedding, image, text |
 MiniMax-M3MiniMax | vs | Kimi-K2.5Moonshot AI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Kimi-K2.5Moonshot AI | vs |  GLM-5.3Z.ai | cross-developer peerstext |
Kimi-K2.5Moonshot AI | vs |  Hy4 previewTencent | cross-developer peerstext |
Seed 2.1 ProByteDance Seed | vs | Kimi-K2.5Moonshot AI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
 Mistral Large 3Mistral AI | vs | Kimi-K2.5Moonshot AI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Primary Evidence
Sources and Freshness
Questions
Kimi K2.5 vs Qwen3.7 Flash FAQs
Is Kimi K2.5 or Qwen3.7 Flash better for coding?+
This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Kimi K2.5 and Qwen3.7 Flash, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.
Which is cheaper, Kimi K2.5 or Qwen3.7 Flash?+
Kimi K2.5 is $0.45 and Qwen3.7 Flash is $0.030 per million tokens, so Qwen3.7 Flash is cheaper on this metric. Kimi K2.5 is $2.25 and Qwen3.7 Flash is $0.13 per million tokens, so Qwen3.7 Flash is cheaper on this metric.
Which has a larger context window, Kimi K2.5 or Qwen3.7 Flash?+
Qwen3.7 Flash has the larger sourced context window. Kimi K2.5 supports 262K and Qwen3.7 Flash supports 1,000K.
Which performs better in benchmarks, Kimi K2.5 or Qwen3.7 Flash?+
There is no overall benchmark winner: At least two independently verified, protocol-matched benchmarks are required for an overall winner.
Can Kimi K2.5 or Qwen3.7 Flash be self-hosted?+
Kimi K2.5 is the only model in this pair currently marked as self-hostable. Kimi K2.5 is open weight; Qwen3.7 Flash is not marked open weight.
Can Kimi K2.5 and Qwen3.7 Flash understand images?+
Kimi K2.5 is documented with image input; Qwen3.7 Flash is documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.
Which can generate longer answers, Kimi K2.5 or Qwen3.7 Flash?+
Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. Kimi K2.5 is — and Qwen3.7 Flash is 66K.
Do Kimi K2.5 and Qwen3.7 Flash support reasoning and tool use?+
Kimi K2.5: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Qwen3.7 Flash: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Feature support does not establish relative quality.
Which is available from more inference providers, Kimi K2.5 or Qwen3.7 Flash?+
Kimi K2.5 has 3 sourced provider routes; Qwen3.7 Flash has 2, so Kimi K2.5 has broader tracked availability.
Which offers better value, Kimi K2.5 or Qwen3.7 Flash?+
There is no universal value winner. Compare the input and output prices above with the matched benchmark result for your workload: cheaper tokens can be offset by different quality, token usage, latency, or provider availability.