Qwen3.5 397B A17B vs Kimi K2.6

At a Glance

Compare
Kimi K2.6Moonshot AI
Intelligence, Cost, and Efficiency
IntelligenceHigher is better · MM Intelligence v4.4#24 of 5750.5 score · 1/3 sources · single-source provisional · missing LiveBench, ARC-AGI-2 · full-core range 16.8–83.5UnrankedNot in the 57-model eligible cohort
Pricing and Limits
Input priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens$0.45Deepinfra ↗ · Oct 19, 2026$0.65Openrouter ↗ · Oct 19, 2026
Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens$3.00Deepinfra ↗ · Oct 19, 2026$3.41Openrouter ↗ · Oct 19, 2026
Context windowMaximum documented tokens262K262K
Model facts checkedAug 28, 2026View model evidence →Aug 28, 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

All benchmark results →
BenchmarkQwen3.5-397B-A17BKimi-K2.6
LMArena Text Arenatext-2026-10-15-a64ca3b12b6e · arena_rating · leader1,437.7299% of row best · rating · qwen3.5-397b-a17b; 95% CI [1434.65086689, 1440.78699055]; votes 93567; rank 811,455.42100% of row best · rating · kimi-k2.6; 95% CI [1451.01237282, 1459.83173802]; votes 40013; rank 44
LMArena Vision Arenavision-2026-10-09-a64ca3b12b6e · arena_rating · leader1,262.5298% of row best · rating · qwen3.5-397b-a17b; 95% CI [1257.19517602, 1267.83577721]; votes 32058; rank 541,282.78100% of row best · rating · kimi-k2.6; 95% CI [1275.98531996, 1289.57750584]; votes 16379; rank 33
Overall ResultCounted from the protocol-matched rows above0 benchmark winsNo overall winner2 benchmark winsNo overall winner

Third-party benchmark Only like-for-like primary-publisher results are shown; raw scores, relative scores, configuration, and token spend remain visible.

Side-by-Side Facts

FieldQwen3.5-397B-A17BKimi-K2.6
DeveloperQwenMoonshot AI
FamilyQwen3 5 397b A17bKimi K2 6
ModelQwen3.5-397B-A17BKimi-K2.6
VersionQwen3.5-397B-A17BKimi-K2.6
Lifecycleactiveactive
Released2026-02-152026-04-20
Knowledge cutoffUnknownUnknown
Input modalitiesText, ImageText, Image
Output modalitiesTextText
Context window262K262K
Total parameters403.4B1.03T
Active parameters17B32B
Licenseapache-2.0other
Open weightsYesYes
API availableYesYes
Self-hostableYesYes
Provider accessDeepinfra (Standard), Hugging Face (Standard), Openrouter (Standard), Together Ai (Standard)Deepinfra (Standard), Fireworks Ai (Standard), Hugging Face (Standard), Openrouter (Standard), Together Ai (Standard)
Capabilitieschat, generation, reasoning, toolschat, generation, reasoning, tools

Qwen3.5 397B A17B Capabilities

chatgenerationreasoningtools
Serving providers4
Canonical IDQwen/Qwen3.5-397B-A17B

Kimi K2.6 Capabilities

chatgenerationreasoningtools
Serving providers5
Canonical IDmoonshotai/Kimi-K2.6

Primary Evidence

Sources and Freshness

Questions

Qwen3.5 397B A17B vs Kimi K2.6 FAQs

Is Qwen3.5 397B A17B or Kimi K2.6 better for coding?+

This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Qwen3.5 397B A17B and Kimi K2.6, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.

Which is cheaper, Qwen3.5 397B A17B or Kimi K2.6?+

Qwen3.5 397B A17B is $0.45 and Kimi K2.6 is $0.65 per million tokens, so Qwen3.5 397B A17B is cheaper on this metric. Qwen3.5 397B A17B is $3.00 and Kimi K2.6 is $3.41 per million tokens, so Qwen3.5 397B A17B is cheaper on this metric.

Which has a larger context window, Qwen3.5 397B A17B or Kimi K2.6?+

Both models have the same sourced context window: 262,144 tokens each.

Which performs better in benchmarks, Qwen3.5 397B A17B or Kimi K2.6?+

There is no overall benchmark winner: An overall winner requires at least two decisive benchmarks from at least two original publishers.

Can Qwen3.5 397B A17B or Kimi K2.6 be self-hosted?+

Both models have the same sourced self-hosting status: supported. Qwen3.5 397B A17B is open weight; Kimi K2.6 is open weight.

Can Qwen3.5 397B A17B and Kimi K2.6 understand images?+

Qwen3.5 397B A17B is documented with image input; Kimi K2.6 is documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.

Which can generate longer answers, Qwen3.5 397B A17B or Kimi K2.6?+

Neither model has a sourced maximum output in this comparison, so a larger limit cannot be determined.

Do Qwen3.5 397B A17B and Kimi K2.6 support reasoning and tool use?+

Qwen3.5 397B A17B: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Kimi K2.6: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Feature support does not establish relative quality.

Which is available from more inference providers, Qwen3.5 397B A17B or Kimi K2.6?+

Qwen3.5 397B A17B has 4 sourced provider routes; Kimi K2.6 has 5, so Kimi K2.6 has broader tracked availability.

Which offers better value, Qwen3.5 397B A17B or Kimi K2.6?+

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.

Send Feedback