Model comparison
Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
Head-to-head evidence from 23 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Verified leaderboard positions: Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) unranked; Qwen3.6-35B-A3B #31
BenchAlign evidence: Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) estimated; Qwen3.6-35B-A3B estimated. Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) and Qwen3.6-35B-A3B share 23 comparable benchmark results. 4 of 8 categories are comparable. 5 results are unique to Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning); 35 to Qwen3.6-35B-A3B.
Updated July 15, 2026- Shared results
- 23
- Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) only
- 5
- Qwen3.6-35B-A3B only
- 35
- Comparable categories
- 4 / 8
Pick Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Qwen3.6-35B-A3B only becomes the better choice if you need the larger 262K context window.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 23 shared benchmark results across 6 evidence categories; 4 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 70 to 59. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning)'s sharpest advantage is in knowledge, where it averages 87.2 against 51.8. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is SWE-bench Verified, 76.8% to 73.4%.
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B gives you the larger context window at 262K, compared with 128K for Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning).
Category breakdown
Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.
| Category | Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) | Δ | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B |
|---|---|---|---|
| Knowledge | Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning)87.2 | Margin← 35.4 | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B51.8 |
| Agentic | Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning)55.0 | Margin← 3.5 | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B51.5 |
| Coding | Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning)76.8 | Margin← 3.0 | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B73.8 |
| Multimodal | Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning)78.5 | Margin← 2.2 | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B76.3 |
| Math | Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning)Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B88.2 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
SWE-bench Verified
CodingA 76.8%B 73.4%Winner: Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning)Δ 3.4SWE-bench Verified: Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) scored 76.8%; Qwen3.6-35B-A3B scored 73.4%. Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
MMMU-Pro
MultimodalA 78.5%B 75.3%Winner: Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning)Δ 3.2MMMU-Pro: Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) scored 78.5%; Qwen3.6-35B-A3B scored 75.3%. Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
MMLU-Pro
KnowledgeA 87.1%B 85.2%Winner: Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning)Δ 1.9MMLU-Pro: Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) scored 87.1%; Qwen3.6-35B-A3B scored 85.2%. Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
GPQA
KnowledgeA 87.6%B 86%Winner: Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning)Δ 1.6GPQA: Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) scored 87.6%; Qwen3.6-35B-A3B scored 86%. Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
Terminal-Bench 2.0
AgenticA 50.8%B 51.5%Winner: Qwen3.6-35B-A3BΔ 0.7Terminal-Bench 2.0: Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) scored 50.8%; Qwen3.6-35B-A3B scored 51.5%. Qwen3.6-35B-A3B wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning)$0.6 input / $3 output | Qwen3.6-35B-A3BNot available | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning)Not available | Qwen3.6-35B-A3BNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning)Not available | Qwen3.6-35B-A3BNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning)128K | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B262K | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticKimi K2.5 (Reasoning) wins17 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 50.8% | 51.5% | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads |
| BrowseCompSource | 60.6% | — | Not comparable |
| APEX-Agents-AASource | 11.5% | — | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 95.9% | 95.3% | Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) leads |
| Gert LabsSource | 32.58% | 42.65% | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 21.7% | 21.4% | Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 25.4% | 27.4% | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 1009 | 1049 | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads |
| Claw-EvalSource | — | 68.7% | Not comparable |
| QwenClawBenchSource | — | 52.6% | Not comparable |
| QwenWebBenchSource | — | 1397 | Not comparable |
| τ³-bench resultsSource | — | 67.2% | Not comparable |
| VITA-BenchSource | — | 35.6% | Not comparable |
| DeepPlanningSource | — | 25.9% | Not comparable |
| ToolathlonSource | — | 26.9% | Not comparable |
| MCP AtlasSource | — | 62.8% | Not comparable |
| WideResearchSource | — | 60.1% | Not comparable |
CodingKimi K2.5 (Reasoning) wins10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 76.8% | 73.4% | Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) leads |
| Vibe Code BenchSource | 17.54% | — | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench HardSource | 34.8% | 34.8% | Tie |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 49.0% | 35.8% | Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) leads |
| AA Coding IndexSource | 46.8% | 41.9% | Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) leads |
| SWE MultilingualSource | — | 67.2% | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench ProSource | — | 49.5% | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 51.5% | Not comparable |
| LiveCodeBenchSource | — | 80.4% | Not comparable |
| NL2RepoSource | — | 29.4% | Not comparable |
Reasoning2 benchmarks
KnowledgeKimi K2.5 (Reasoning) wins11 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 87.6% | 86% | Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) leads |
| MMLU-ProSource | 87.1% | 85.2% | Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) leads |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 35.4% | 31.6% | Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 87.9% | 84.1% | Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) leads |
| AA-HLESource | 29.4% | 20.2% | Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -8.1% | -21.4% | Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 34.3% | 18.9% | Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 64.6% | 49.7% | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads |
| SuperGPQASource | — | 64.7% | Not comparable |
| C-EvalSource | — | 90% | Not comparable |
| HLESource | — | 21.4% | Not comparable |
Math6 benchmarks
MultimodalKimi K2.5 (Reasoning) wins16 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMMU-ProSource | 78.5% | 75.3% | Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) leads |
| AA-MMMU-ProSource | 75.4% | 75.0% | Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) leads |
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | 1284 | — | Not comparable |
| MMMUSource | — | 81.7% | Not comparable |
| RealWorldQASource | — | 85.3% | Not comparable |
| OmniDocBench 1.5Source | — | 89.9% | Not comparable |
| CharXivSource | — | 78% | Not comparable |
| SimpleVQASource | — | 58.9% | Not comparable |
| CC-OCRSource | — | 81.9% | Not comparable |
| AI2D_TESTSource | — | 92.7% | Not comparable |
| RefCOCO (avg)Source | — | 92.0% | Not comparable |
| ODINW13Source | — | 50.8% | Not comparable |
| Video-MME (with subtitle)Source | — | 86.6% | Not comparable |
| Video-MME (w/o subtitle)Source | — | 82.5% | Not comparable |
| VideoMMMUSource | — | 83.7% | Not comparable |
| MLVU (M-Avg)Source | — | 86.2% | Not comparable |
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 70.2% | 64.4% | Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) leads |
Frequently Asked Questions (5)
Which is better, Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) or Qwen3.6-35B-A3B?
Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 70 to 59. The biggest single separator in this matchup is SWE-bench Verified, where the scores are 76.8% and 73.4%.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) or Qwen3.6-35B-A3B?
Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 87.2 versus 51.8. Inside this category, AA-Omniscience Accuracy is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for coding, Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) or Qwen3.6-35B-A3B?
Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 76.8 versus 73.8. Inside this category, AA-SciCode is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for agentic tasks, Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) or Qwen3.6-35B-A3B?
Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 55 versus 51.5. Inside this category, GDPval-AA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for multimodal and grounded tasks, Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) or Qwen3.6-35B-A3B?
Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 78.5 versus 76.3. Inside this category, MMMU-Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Related Comparisons
The AI models change fast. We track them for you.
A weekly brief for engineers and researchers covering new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.