Kimi K2.7 Code vs Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B leads Kimi K2.7 Code on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 39.9 to 25.8, and Kimi K2.7 Code costs 1.5x less per output token ($4.00 vs $6.00 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 7 benchmarks have a result for both.
Kimi K2.7 Code or Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B: which to pick
Only Kimi K2.7 Code has a coding score, 53.4 on the Vibe Coding Index; Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Pick Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B for a larger context window (1.05M against 262K tokens) and work measured by AA Coding Index or SciCode, where it leads.
- Shared results
- 7
- Kimi K2.7 Code only
- 44
- Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B only
- 0
- Like-for-like categories
- 5 of 9
Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.
Which one for your work
Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Only Kimi K2.7 Code has a coding score, so no call is made.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B leads, 39.9 against 25.8.
Same board, both measured
Agentic work
AA Agentic Index
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B leads, 50.1 against 21.0.
Same board, both measured
Web design
Design Arena: websites
No call
Only Kimi K2.7 Code has a Design Arena: websites result, 1264.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B takes 1.05M tokens against 262K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Kimi K2.7 Code
Kimi K2.7 Code $0.0029, Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B $0.0050 per turn.
List prices
Cost per solved task
One SWE-bench Verified task, solved
No call
Only Kimi K2.7 Code has the number, $0.35.
Directional only
At a glance
- Coding index
- Kimi K2.7 Code 53.4 from 4 benchmarks, Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B not benchmarked.
- Widest category
- Agentic work, 29.1 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
- Widest single gap
- AA Agentic Index: Kimi K2.7 Code 21.0 against Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B 50.1, 29.1 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Kimi K2.7 Code $4.00 against Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B $6.00 per million output tokens, 1.5x apart.
- Context window
- Kimi K2.7 Code takes 262K tokens, Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B 1.05M.
Benchmark by benchmark
First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.
| Category | Kimi K2.7 Code | Bars | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 0 | 2 | ||
| Intelligence | 0 | 1 | ||
| Agentic work | 0 | 1 | ||
| Reasoning | 0 | 2 | ||
| General | 0 | 1 | ||
| All shared boards | 0 | 7 |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index02
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.7 Code | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1474 | Not measured | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| AA Coding Index | 60.8 | 71.9 | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B |
| LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) | 82.0% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI) | 78.2% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI) | 47.2% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| Code migration (Vals AI) | 25.4% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| ProgramBench (Vals AI) | 0.0% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI) | 67.0% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| SkillsBench (Vals AI) | 50.0% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| SciCode | 47.8% | 54.1% | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | 44.7% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| FrontierCode | 30.1% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| WeirdML | 54.1% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| ALE-Bench | 886.2 | Not measured | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| LMArena WebDev: React | 1475 | Not measured | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| LMArena WebDev: HTML | 1451 | Not measured | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| LMArena WebDev: from an image | 1513 | Not measured | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 22 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.7 Code | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 25.8 | 39.9 | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 150.1 | Not measured | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.7 Code | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Agentic Index | 21.0 | 50.1 | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B |
| Design Arena: agents building web apps | 1176 | Not measured | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| Design Arena: agents building full-stack apps | 1175 | Not measured | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| Design Arena: agents building mobile apps | 1143 | Not measured | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| Design Arena: agents building Android apps | 1137 | Not measured | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| Design Arena: agents building Godot games | 1147 | Not measured | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| Design Arena: agents building games | 1131 | Not measured | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| Design Arena: HTML slides | 1201 | Not measured | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| Design Arena: PowerPoint slides | 1154 | Not measured | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| τ²-Bench Telecom | 90.1% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| APEX-Agents | 37.6% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| Vending-Bench 2 | $5,083 | Not measured | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 29 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.7 Code | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 89.6% | 93.5% | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 35.0% | 42.4% | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | 87.9% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| SimpleBench | 57.9% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| Chess puzzles | 14.0% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 17 boards here | |||
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index3 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.7 Code | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME | 95.6% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3 | 54.0% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| FrontierMath, tier 4 | 12.2% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here | |||
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.7 Code | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| SimpleQA Verified | 36.5% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 17 boards here | |||
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.7 Code | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: websites | 1264 | Not measured | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| Design Arena: UI components | 1259 | Not measured | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| Design Arena: game dev | 1220 | Not measured | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| Design Arena: data viz | 1227 | Not measured | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| Design Arena: 3D | 1241 | Not measured | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| Design Arena: all code categories | 1253 | Not measured | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| Design Arena: SVG | 1176 | Not measured | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| Design Arena: ASCII art | 1196 | Not measured | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here | |||
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.7 Code | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| IFBench | 63.1% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 79.3% | 80.3% | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 48.8% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 43 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.7 Code | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 5 boards here | |||
What each workload costs
Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.
Chat turn
1K input + 500 output tokens
Kimi K2.7 Code costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Kimi K2.7 Code costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Kimi K2.7 Code costs less
Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.
Specification differences
The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.
| Specification | MoonshotAI Kimi K2.7 Code | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Moonshot AI | Qwen |
| Weights | Open weights | Open weights |
| Released | June 12, 2026 | August 12, 2026 |
| Context window | 262K | 1.05M |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.95 | $2.00 |
| Output $/Mtok | $4.00 | $6.00 |
| Coding index | 53.4 | Not benchmarked |
| Independent measurements behind it | 4 | 0 |
| Cost per solved task | $0.35 | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Kimi K2.7 Code better than Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B for coding?
Only Kimi K2.7 Code has a coding score, 53.4 on the Vibe Coding Index; Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B for a larger context window (1.05M against 262K tokens) and work measured by AA Coding Index or SciCode, where it leads.
Which is cheaper, Kimi K2.7 Code or Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B?
Kimi K2.7 Code costs $0.95 per million input tokens and $4.00 per million output tokens; Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B costs $2.00 and $6.00. Cost per solved task is known for Kimi K2.7 Code only.
Which has the bigger context window, Kimi K2.7 Code or Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B?
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B, with 1.05M tokens against 262K.
How many benchmarks is the Kimi K2.7 Code vs Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B comparison based on?
7 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Kimi K2.7 Code's coding index rests on 4 independent benchmarks and Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.