Skip to main content
BenchLM
Advertise

Model comparison

Kimi K2.7 Code vs Qwen3.7 Plus

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 17 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

Kimi K2.7 Code
Moonshot AI
54.03/100
Margin
12.0pts
winning →
66.06/100
0 category wins0 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Kimi K2.7 Code #92 (Estimated); Qwen3.7 Plus #27 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Kimi K2.7 Code and Qwen3.7 Plus share 17 comparable benchmark results. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 6 results are unique to Kimi K2.7 Code; 52 to Qwen3.7 Plus.

Updated July 27, 2026
Shared results
17
Kimi K2.7 Code only
6
Qwen3.7 Plus only
52
Comparable categories
0 / 8

Benchmark data for Kimi K2.7 Code and Qwen3.7 Plus is coming soon on BenchLM.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 17 shared benchmark results across 6 evidence categories; 0 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

BenchLM has partial data for these models, but not enough overlapping benchmark coverage to produce a fair score-level comparison yet.

Qwen3.7 Plus has the larger context window at 1M, compared with 256K for Kimi K2.7 Code.

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 scores and score margins for Kimi K2.7 Code and Qwen3.7 Plus
CategoryKimi K2.7 CodeΔQwen3.7 Plus
AgenticKimi K2.7 CodeNot measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3.7 Plus71.7
CodingKimi K2.7 CodeNot measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3.7 Plus75.6
ReasoningKimi K2.7 CodeNot measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3.7 Plus91.7
KnowledgeKimi K2.7 CodeNot measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3.7 Plus60.1
MathKimi K2.7 CodeNot measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3.7 Plus92.9
MultilingualKimi K2.7 CodeNot measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3.7 Plus85.4
MultimodalKimi K2.7 CodeNot measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3.7 Plus81.5
Inst. FollowingKimi K2.7 CodeNot measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3.7 Plus84.5

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

MetricKimi K2.7 CodeQwen3.7 PlusComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensKimi K2.7 Code$0.95 input / $4 outputQwen3.7 PlusNot availableA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondKimi K2.7 CodeNot availableQwen3.7 PlusNot availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenKimi K2.7 CodeNot availableQwen3.7 PlusNot availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensKimi K2.7 Code256KQwen3.7 Plus1MQwen3.7 Plus lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkKimi K2.7 CodeQwen3.7 PlusResult
Kimi Claw 24/7Source 46.9%—Not comparable
MCP AtlasSource 76%73.2%Kimi K2.7 Code leads
MCP Mark VerifiedSource 81.1%—Not comparable
AA Agentic IndexSource 29.6%20.8%Kimi K2.7 Code leads
τ²-bench resultsSource 90.1%93%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
GDPval-AASource 34.3%22.1%Kimi K2.7 Code leads
GDPval-AASource 1186943Kimi K2.7 Code leads
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source —70.3%Not comparable
QwenClawBenchSource —61.8%Not comparable
QwenWebBenchSource —1536Not comparable
Claw-EvalSource —62.7%Not comparable
BFCL v4Source —72.9%Not comparable
VITA-BenchSource —45.6%Not comparable
DeepPlanningSource —62.3%Not comparable
OSWorld-VerifiedSource —73.3%Not comparable
AndroidWorldSource —81.0%Not comparable
APEX-Agents-AASource —22.4%Not comparable
OSWorld 2.0Source —2.8%Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkKimi K2.7 CodeQwen3.7 PlusResult
Kimi Code Bench v2Source 62.0%—Not comparable
ProgramBenchSource 53.6%—Not comparable
MLS-Bench LiteSource 35.1%—Not comparable
cursorBench32Source 49.7%—Not comparable
AA Coding IndexSource 60.8%55.9%Kimi K2.7 Code leads
AA-SciCodeSource 47.5%45.5%Kimi K2.7 Code leads
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source —70.3%Not comparable
SWE-bench VerifiedSource —77.7%Not comparable
SWE-bench ProSource —57.6%Not comparable
SWE MultilingualSource —75.8%Not comparable
NL2RepoSource —41.1%Not comparable
SciCodeSource —51.3%Not comparable
LiveCodeBenchSource —89.6%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkKimi K2.7 CodeQwen3.7 PlusResult
AA-LCRSource 66.3%65.0%Kimi K2.7 Code leads
CritPtSource 10.0%9.1%Kimi K2.7 Code leads
MRCRv2Source —91.7%Not comparable
Knowledge
BenchmarkKimi K2.7 CodeQwen3.7 PlusResult
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 42.0%39.0%Kimi K2.7 Code leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 89.6%90.0%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
AA-HLESource 32.8%33.4%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -10.7%2.4%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 38.6%22.2%Kimi K2.7 Code leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 80.3%25.5%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
GPQASource —90.3%Not comparable
GPQA-DSource —90.3%Not comparable
HLESource —34.7%Not comparable
MMLU-ProSource —88.5%Not comparable
MMLU-ReduxSource —94.5%Not comparable
SuperGPQASource —71.4%Not comparable
MMMLUSource —89.0%Not comparable
Math
BenchmarkKimi K2.7 CodeQwen3.7 PlusResult
HMMT Feb 2026Source —92.9%Not comparable
IMOAnswerBenchSource —86.0%Not comparable
ApexSource —22.7%Not comparable
Multilingual
BenchmarkKimi K2.7 CodeQwen3.7 PlusResult
MMLU-ProXSource —85.4%Not comparable
NOVA-63Source —58.8%Not comparable
INCLUDESource —83.0%Not comparable
MAXIFESource —88.8%Not comparable
PolyMathSource —84.0%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkKimi K2.7 CodeQwen3.7 PlusResult
Design Arena WebsiteSource 13001297Kimi K2.7 Code leads
MMMU-ProSource —79%Not comparable
MathVisionSource —90.3%Not comparable
CharXivSource —85.9%Not comparable
ERQASource —69.8%Not comparable
MedXpertQA (MM)Source —71.0%Not comparable
ScreenSpot ProSource —79.0%Not comparable
SimpleVQASource —81.7%Not comparable
MMSearch-PlusSource —41.4%Not comparable
RealWorldQASource —86.9%Not comparable
OmniDocBench 1.5Source —91.4%Not comparable
OCRBench V2Source —70.7%Not comparable
ODINW13Source —51.1%Not comparable
Video-MME (with subtitle)Source —88.0%Not comparable
VideoMMMUSource —85.4%Not comparable
MLVU (M-Avg)Source —87.4%Not comparable
AA-MMMU-ProSource —80.5%Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkKimi K2.7 CodeQwen3.7 PlusResult
AA-IFBenchSource 63.1%78.0%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
IFEvalSource —94.6%Not comparable
IFBenchSource —79.1%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (3)

Can I compare Kimi K2.7 Code and Qwen3.7 Plus on BenchLM yet?

Not fully yet. BenchLM is tracking both models, but the sourced benchmark breakdown for this comparison is still coming soon.

Why does this comparison show “coming soon”?

BenchLM only shows category winners and benchmark-level calls when we have sourced results that can be compared fairly. For these models, the public benchmark coverage is not complete enough yet.

What data is available for Kimi K2.7 Code and Qwen3.7 Plus today?

Kimi K2.7 Code: $0.95 input / $4.00 output per 1M tokens Both model pages still include creator, context window, reasoning mode, and other metadata while benchmark coverage fills in.

Self-host vs API cost

Estimates at 50,000 req/day · 1000 tokens/req average.

Kimi K2.7 Code
API / mo$3,713
Self-host / mo$18,221
Break-even326M/day
Qwen3.7 Plus
API / mo$0
Self-host / moNot listed
Break-even—
Proprietary model — self-hosting not applicable.
Model the full break-even

Related Comparisons

Explore More

Moonshot AI Compare Pricing Methodology Find Your Best LLM Overall Rankings
Last updated: July 27, 2026

Know when it’s worth switching models

The model to choose, the cheaper alternative, and the release we would wait on.

One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.