Skip to main content

Model comparison

Kimi K3 vs Qwen3.8 Max

Updated August 3, 2026. Public scores include evidence status and uncertainty. They are not guarantees for a specific workload.

Kimi K3

Moonshot AI

79.9/100

Supported · Public rank #5

90% interval 77.1–82.7

Qwen3.8 Max

Alibaba

65.4/100

Estimated · Public rank #31

90% interval 55.5–75.3

Kimi K3 has the higher public score, 79.87 versus 65.4, and the 90% score intervals do not overlap.

19 results are shared. Category rows based on different benchmark sets are marked directional and do not name a winner.

Which one for your work

Recommendations appear only when a shared evidence basis or an explicit operating constraint supports the call. Secondary and unsupported use cases stay disclosed below the initial list.

  • Long documents

    Prompts that approach the documented context limit

    Kimi K3

    Kimi K3 has the larger documented context window.

    Confidence: documented

Show secondary and unsupported calls
  • Coding work

    Code generation, repair, and software-engineering tasks

    Not enough matched evidence

    No shared weighted benchmark basis supports a winner.

    Confidence: limited

  • Agentic work

    Tool use, computer use, and multi-step task completion

    Not enough matched evidence

    No shared weighted benchmark basis supports a winner.

    Confidence: limited

  • Chat turn cost

    1K fresh input + 500 output tokens

    Not enough matched evidence

    A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.

    Confidence: listed-rates

  • Cache-heavy agent loop cost

    200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens

    Not enough matched evidence

    A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.

    Confidence: listed-rates

  • Repository review cost

    50K fresh input + 3K output tokens

    Not enough matched evidence

    A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.

    Confidence: listed-rates

What is actually comparable

Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results present for only one model describe coverage, not superiority.

Shared results
19
Kimi K3 only
16
Qwen3.8 Max only
33
Like-for-like categories
1 / 8

1 category uses different evidence sets. Those rows remain visible for coverage context but do not name a winner.

Category results, on a stated basis

Each row states whether both averages use the same weighted benchmark set. Directional and not-comparable rows remain visible, but they never receive a winner in this template.

Knowledge

Like-for-like
Kimi K3
61.0
Qwen3.8 Max
50.2
Weighted basis
2 vs 2 rows
Reading
Kimi K3 leads

Multimodal

Directional only
Kimi K3
78.5
Qwen3.8 Max
86.3
Weighted basis
3 vs 2 rows
Reading
Directional only

Agentic

Not comparable
Kimi K3
89.5
Qwen3.8 Max
86.1
Weighted basis
2 vs 1 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Coding

Not comparable
Kimi K3
Not measured
Qwen3.8 Max
67.7
Weighted basis
0 vs 1 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Reasoning

Not comparable
Kimi K3
Not measured
Qwen3.8 Max
78.3
Weighted basis
0 vs 2 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Math

Not comparable
Kimi K3
Not measured
Qwen3.8 Max
Not measured
Weighted basis
0 vs 0 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Multilingual

Not comparable
Kimi K3
Not measured
Qwen3.8 Max
Not measured
Weighted basis
0 vs 0 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Instruction following

Not comparable
Kimi K3
Not measured
Qwen3.8 Max
82.8
Weighted basis
0 vs 1 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Shape of the matched evidence

Only shared public evidence is shown. Sparse evidence stays a ruled list rather than being closed into a radar shape.

Too few matched category axes support a radar. The ruled list below shows only shared benchmark results; positions use each benchmark’s normalized display scale when available.

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes turn per-token rates into comparable decisions. Each scenario states context fit and whether cached input had to fall back to the published list-input rate.

Chat turn

1K fresh input + 500 output tokens

Kimi K3
$0.0105
Fits in one request
Qwen3.8 Max
API rate not published
Fits in one request

Qwen3.8 Max has no comparable published API token rate.

Repository review

50K fresh input + 3K output tokens

Kimi K3
$0.195
Fits in one request
Qwen3.8 Max
API rate not published
Fits in one request

Qwen3.8 Max has no comparable published API token rate.

Cache-heavy agent loop

200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens

Kimi K3
$0.27
Fits in one request
Qwen3.8 Max
API rate not published
Fits in one request
Cached-input rate unavailable

Qwen3.8 Max has no comparable published API token rate.

Specification differences

Sourced differences are shown directly. Missing facts stay explicit instead of being inferred from a model name or family.

Cached-input rate

A missing cached-input rate falls back to the listed input rate only in the stated workload estimate.

Kimi K3

$0.3 per 1M cached input tokens

Qwen3.8 Max

No comparable hosted API rate

Alibaba Cloud Model Studio pricing

Documented inputs

Kimi K3

Not sourced

Qwen3.8 Max

Not sourced

Documented outputs

Kimi K3

Not sourced

Qwen3.8 Max

Not sourced

Provider availability

Kimi K3

Not sourced

Qwen3.8 Max

Not sourced

Reasoning profile

Kimi K3

Reasoning

Qwen3.8 Max

Reasoning

Weight access

Kimi K3

Pending

Qwen3.8 Max

Proprietary

License

Kimi K3

Pending

Qwen3.8 Max

Proprietary

Release date

Kimi K3

2026-07-16

Qwen3.8 Max

2026-08-03

If you already use one of these models
Deployment change
The models list different providers, so authentication, endpoint behavior, limits, and feature support may change.
Quality signal
Kimi K3 has the higher public score, 79.87 versus 65.4, and the 90% score intervals do not overlap.
Workload cost
A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Context tradeoff
Kimi K3 has the larger documented window (1.05M).

Run the same representative tasks against both endpoints before changing production traffic.

Benchmark evidence

The full public result ledger is available for audit without forcing a wide desktop table onto a phone.

Browse raw public benchmark evidence68 rows

Agentic

  • Terminal-Bench 2.0

    Kimi K388.3%
    Source
    Qwen3.8 Max

    Not directly comparable

  • BrowseComp

    Kimi K391.2%
    Source
    Qwen3.8 Max

    Not directly comparable

  • DeepSearchQA

    Kimi K395.0%
    Source
    Qwen3.8 Max

    Not directly comparable

  • Toolathlon-Verified

    Kimi K373.2%
    Source
    Qwen3.8 Max72.5%
    Source

    Kimi K3 leads this result

  • MCP Atlas

    Kimi K384.2%
    Source
    Qwen3.8 Max

    Not directly comparable

  • AutomationBench

    Kimi K330.8%
    Source
    Qwen3.8 Max27.3%
    Source

    Kimi K3 leads this result

  • JobBench

    Kimi K352.9%
    Source
    Qwen3.8 Max53.4%
    Source

    Qwen3.8 Max leads this result

  • APEX-Agents

    Kimi K337.6%
    Source
    Qwen3.8 Max

    Not directly comparable

  • SpreadsheetBench 2

    Kimi K334.8%
    Source
    Qwen3.8 Max

    Not directly comparable

  • DECK-Bench

    Kimi K373.5%
    Source
    Qwen3.8 Max

    Not directly comparable

  • Terminal-Bench 2.1

    Kimi K3
    Qwen3.8 Max86.6%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • CoWorkBench

    Kimi K3
    Qwen3.8 Max74.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • skillsBench

    Kimi K3
    Qwen3.8 Max70.2%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • Agents' Last Exam

    Kimi K3
    Qwen3.8 Max52.4%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • WideResearch

    Kimi K3
    Qwen3.8 Max81.9%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • HLE w/ tools

    Kimi K3
    Qwen3.8 Max56.2%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • OSWorld-Verified

    Kimi K3
    Qwen3.8 Max86.1%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • OSWorld 2.0

    Kimi K3
    Qwen3.8 Max19.4%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • WebArena-Verified

    Kimi K3
    Qwen3.8 Max66.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • AndroidWorld

    Kimi K3
    Qwen3.8 Max85.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MobileWorld

    Kimi K3
    Qwen3.8 Max77.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Coding

  • deepSwe

    Kimi K367.5%
    Source
    Qwen3.8 Max56.6%
    Source

    Kimi K3 leads this result

  • FrontierSWE

    Kimi K381.2%
    Source
    Qwen3.8 Max73.5%
    Source

    Kimi K3 leads this result

  • ProgramBench

    Kimi K377.8%
    Source
    Qwen3.8 Max

    Not directly comparable

  • Kimi Code Bench v2

    Kimi K372.9%
    Source
    Qwen3.8 Max

    Not directly comparable

  • sweMarathon

    Kimi K342%
    Source
    Qwen3.8 Max

    Not directly comparable

  • PostTrain Bench

    Kimi K336.6%
    Source
    Qwen3.8 Max

    Not directly comparable

  • MLS-Bench Lite

    Kimi K348.3%
    Source
    Qwen3.8 Max41.0%
    Source

    Kimi K3 leads this result

  • VulcanBench v3

    Kimi K373.9%
    Source
    Qwen3.8 Max

    Not directly comparable

  • Terminal-Bench 2.1

    Kimi K3
    Qwen3.8 Max86.6%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • SWE-bench Pro

    Kimi K3
    Qwen3.8 Max67.7%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • NL2Repo

    Kimi K3
    Qwen3.8 Max55.9%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • PaperBench

    Kimi K3
    Qwen3.8 Max93.0%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Reasoning

  • MRCRv2

    Kimi K3
    Qwen3.8 Max92.9%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • LongBench v2

    Kimi K3
    Qwen3.8 Max66.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Knowledge

  • GPQA

    Kimi K393.5%
    Source
    Qwen3.8 Max92.6%
    Source

    Kimi K3 leads this result

  • GPQA-D

    Kimi K393.5%
    Source
    Qwen3.8 Max92.6%
    Source

    Kimi K3 leads this result

  • HLE

    Kimi K356%
    Source
    Qwen3.8 Max43.6%
    Source

    Kimi K3 leads this result

  • HLE w/o tools

    Kimi K343.5%
    Source
    Qwen3.8 Max43.6%
    Source

    Qwen3.8 Max leads this result

Multimodal

  • OfficeQA Pro

    Kimi K363.3%
    Source
    Qwen3.8 Max

    Not directly comparable

  • MMMU-Pro

    Kimi K381.6%
    Source
    Qwen3.8 Max82.3%
    Source

    Qwen3.8 Max leads this result

  • MMMU-Pro w/ Python

    Kimi K383.4%
    Source
    Qwen3.8 Max

    Not directly comparable

  • CharXiv w/o tools

    Kimi K384.8%
    Source
    Qwen3.8 Max88.4%
    Source

    Qwen3.8 Max leads this result

  • CharXiv

    Kimi K391.3%
    Source
    Qwen3.8 Max93.5%
    Source

    Qwen3.8 Max leads this result

  • MathVision

    Kimi K394.3%
    Source
    Qwen3.8 Max95.2%
    Source

    Qwen3.8 Max leads this result

  • MathVision w/ Python

    Kimi K397.8%
    Source
    Qwen3.8 Max97.7%
    Source

    Kimi K3 leads this result

  • BabyVision w/ Python

    Kimi K385.7%
    Source
    Qwen3.8 Max91.3%
    Source

    Qwen3.8 Max leads this result

  • ZeroBench

    Kimi K323.0%
    Source
    Qwen3.8 Max24.0%
    Source

    Qwen3.8 Max leads this result

  • ZeroBench w/ Python

    Kimi K341.0%
    Source
    Qwen3.8 Max49.0%
    Source

    Qwen3.8 Max leads this result

  • WorldVQA ForceAnswer

    Kimi K351.0%
    Source
    Qwen3.8 Max

    Not directly comparable

  • OmniDocBench

    Kimi K391.1%
    Source
    Qwen3.8 Max

    Not directly comparable

  • PerceptionBench

    Kimi K358.5%
    Source
    Qwen3.8 Max63.5%
    Source

    Qwen3.8 Max leads this result

  • BabyVision

    Kimi K3
    Qwen3.8 Max82.0%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MedXpertQA (MM)

    Kimi K3
    Qwen3.8 Max80.4%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • ScreenSpot Pro

    Kimi K3
    Qwen3.8 Max84.5%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • Vision2Web

    Kimi K3
    Qwen3.8 Max69.0%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • OmniDocBench 1.5

    Kimi K3
    Qwen3.8 Max92.1%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • OCRBench V2

    Kimi K3
    Qwen3.8 Max74.2%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • CC-OCR

    Kimi K3
    Qwen3.8 Max79.6%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • RealWorldQA

    Kimi K3
    Qwen3.8 Max88.0%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • ERQA

    Kimi K3
    Qwen3.8 Max77.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • SimpleVQA

    Kimi K3
    Qwen3.8 Max75.0%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • Video-MME (with subtitle)

    Kimi K3
    Qwen3.8 Max90.4%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • VideoMMMU

    Kimi K3
    Qwen3.8 Max88.7%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MMVU

    Kimi K3
    Qwen3.8 Max82.4%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MLVU (M-Avg)

    Kimi K3
    Qwen3.8 Max90.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • LVBench

    Kimi K3
    Qwen3.8 Max81.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Instruction following

  • IFBench

    Kimi K3
    Qwen3.8 Max82.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Frequently asked questions

Which is better, Kimi K3 or Qwen3.8 Max?

Kimi K3 has the higher public score, 79.87 versus 65.4, and the 90% score intervals do not overlap. That is the clearest overall quality signal in the current public data.

Which is better for coding, Kimi K3 or Qwen3.8 Max?

The published evidence does not provide a shared weighted coding basis for both models, so BenchLM does not name a coding winner.

Which is better for agentic tasks, Kimi K3 or Qwen3.8 Max?

The published evidence does not provide a shared weighted agentic tasks basis for both models, so BenchLM does not name a agentic tasks winner.

Which costs less, Kimi K3 or Qwen3.8 Max?

Both models do not have comparable published API token rates, so this page does not name a universal price winner.

Which has the larger context window, Kimi K3 or Qwen3.8 Max?

Kimi K3 has the larger documented context window: 1.05M, compared with 1M.

Related comparisons

Last updated August 3, 2026

Watch Kimi K3 vs Qwen3.8 Max

One weekly email when material rank, price, or benchmark evidence changes make this matchup worth revisiting.

Read a sample issue

Join 2,000+ readers.