Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B vs Kimi K2.5
At a Glance
| Compare |  Kimi K2.5Moonshot AI | |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing and Limits | ||
| Input priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | $2.00Deepinfra ↗ · Oct 5, 2026 | $0.45Deepinfra ↗ · Aug 29, 2026 |
| Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | $6.00Deepinfra ↗ · Oct 5, 2026 | $2.25Deepinfra ↗ · Aug 29, 2026 |
| Context windowMaximum documented tokens | 262K | 262K |
| Model facts checked | Aug 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
Side-by-Side Facts
| Field | Qwen3.8-2.4T-A95B | Kimi-K2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| Developer | Qwen | Moonshot AI |
| Family | Qwen3 8 2 4t A95b | Kimi K2 5 |
| Model | Qwen3.8-2.4T-A95B | Kimi-K2.5 |
| Version | Qwen3.8-2.4T-A95B | Kimi-K2.5 |
| Lifecycle | active | active |
| Released | Unknown | 2026-01-27 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Unknown | Unknown |
| Input modalities | Text | Text, Image |
| Output modalities | Text | Text |
| Context window | 262K | 262K |
| Total parameters | 2.45T | 1.03T |
| Active parameters | 95B | 32B |
| License | other | other |
| Open weights | Yes | Yes |
| API available | Yes | Yes |
| Self-hostable | Yes | Yes |
| Provider access | Deepinfra (Standard), Fireworks Ai (Standard), Hugging Face (Standard), Openrouter (Standard), Together Ai (Standard) | Deepinfra (Standard), Hugging Face (Standard), Openrouter (Standard) |
| Capabilities | chat, generation, reasoning, tools | chat, generation, reasoning, tools |
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B Capabilities
Kimi K2.5 Capabilities
Related Comparisons
All text comparisons →| A | Pair | B | Context |
|---|---|---|---|
| vs |  Hy4 previewTencent | cross-developer peerstext | |
| vs |  DeepSeek-V4-ProDeepSeek | cross-developer peerstext | |
| vs |  Qwen3.8-27BQwen | family variantstext | |
| vs | Kimi-K2-InstructMoonshot AI | cross-developer peerstext | |
| vs | Kimi-K2-ThinkingMoonshot AI | cross-developer peerstext | |
| vs | Kimi-K2.6Moonshot AI | cross-developer peerstext | |
Qwen3-Coder-NextQwen | vs | family variantstext | |
| vs | family variantstext | ||
| vs | family variantstext | ||
| vs |  Inkling-SmallThinking Machines Lab | cross-developer peerstext | |
| vs |  GLM-5Z.ai | cross-developer peerstext | |
| vs | GLM-5.1Z.ai | cross-developer peerstext |
Primary Evidence
Sources and Freshness
Questions
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B vs Kimi K2.5 FAQs
Is Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B or Kimi K2.5 better for coding?+
This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B and Kimi K2.5, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.
Which is cheaper, Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B or Kimi K2.5?+
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is $2.00 and Kimi K2.5 is $0.45 per million tokens, so Kimi K2.5 is cheaper on this metric. Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is $6.00 and Kimi K2.5 is $2.25 per million tokens, so Kimi K2.5 is cheaper on this metric.
Which has a larger context window, Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B or Kimi K2.5?+
Both models have the same sourced context window: 262,144 tokens each.
Which performs better in benchmarks, Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B or Kimi K2.5?+
There is no overall benchmark winner: At least two independently verified, protocol-matched benchmarks are required for an overall winner.
Can Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B or Kimi K2.5 be self-hosted?+
Both models have the same sourced self-hosting status: supported. Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is open weight; Kimi K2.5 is open weight.
Can Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B and Kimi K2.5 understand images?+
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is not documented with image input; Kimi K2.5 is documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.
Which can generate longer answers, Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B or Kimi K2.5?+
Neither model has a sourced maximum output in this comparison, so a larger limit cannot be determined.
Do Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B and Kimi K2.5 support reasoning and tool use?+
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B: reasoning and tool calling. Kimi K2.5: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Feature support does not establish relative quality.
Which is available from more inference providers, Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B or Kimi K2.5?+
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B has 5 sourced provider routes; Kimi K2.5 has 3, so Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B has broader tracked availability.
Which offers better value, Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B or Kimi K2.5?+
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.