Skip to main content

Kimi K2.6 vs Qwen3.5 397B

Head-to-head comparison across 4benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.

Kimi K2.6

84

VS

Qwen3.5 397B

64

3 categoriesvs1 categories

Verified leaderboard positions: Kimi K2.6 #6 · Qwen3.5 397B #15

Pick Kimi K2.6 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Qwen3.5 397B only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.

Category Radar

Head-to-Head by Category

Category Breakdown

Agentic

Kimi K2.6
73.1vs56.2

+16.9 difference

Coding

Kimi K2.6
72vs60.3

+11.7 difference

Knowledge

Qwen3.5 397B
53.8vs65.2

+11.4 difference

Multimodal

Kimi K2.6
79.7vs79.6

+0.1 difference

Operational Comparison

Kimi K2.6

Qwen3.5 397B

Price (per 1M tokens)

$0.95 / $4

$0.6 / $3.6

Speed

N/A

96 t/s

Latency (TTFT)

N/A

2.44s

Context Window

256K

128K

Quick Verdict

Pick Kimi K2.6 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Qwen3.5 397B only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.

Kimi K2.6 is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 84 to 64. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.

Kimi K2.6's sharpest advantage is in agentic, where it averages 73.1 against 56.2. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is BrowseComp, 83.2% to 62%. Qwen3.5 397B does hit back in knowledge, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.

Kimi K2.6 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $0.95 input / $4.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.60 input / $3.60 output per 1M tokens for Qwen3.5 397B. Kimi K2.6 is the reasoning model in the pair, while Qwen3.5 397B is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. Kimi K2.6 gives you the larger context window at 256K, compared with 128K for Qwen3.5 397B.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Frequently Asked Questions (5)

Which is better, Kimi K2.6 or Qwen3.5 397B?

Kimi K2.6 is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 84 to 64. The biggest single separator in this matchup is BrowseComp, where the scores are 83.2% and 62%.

Which is better for knowledge tasks, Kimi K2.6 or Qwen3.5 397B?

Qwen3.5 397B has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 65.2 versus 53.8. Inside this category, HLE is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for coding, Kimi K2.6 or Qwen3.5 397B?

Kimi K2.6 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 72 versus 60.3. Inside this category, SWE-bench Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for agentic tasks, Kimi K2.6 or Qwen3.5 397B?

Kimi K2.6 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 73.1 versus 56.2. Inside this category, BrowseComp is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for multimodal and grounded tasks, Kimi K2.6 or Qwen3.5 397B?

Kimi K2.6 has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 79.7 versus 79.6. Inside this category, MathVision is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: April 29, 2026

The AI models change fast. We track them for you.

For engineers, researchers, and the plain curious — a weekly brief on new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.

Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.