Kimi K2 Thinking vs Qwen3.6 35B A3B
Kimi K2 Thinking leads Qwen3.6 35B A3B on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 22.0 to 18.2, and Qwen3.6 35B A3B costs 2.5x less per output token ($1.00 vs $2.50 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 10 benchmarks have a result for both.
Kimi K2 Thinking or Qwen3.6 35B A3B: which to pick
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Pick Kimi K2 Thinking for work measured by Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) or τ²-Bench Telecom, where it leads.
- Shared results
- 10
- Kimi K2 Thinking only
- 20
- Qwen3.6 35B A3B only
- 10
- 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
Neither has a coding score yet.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
Kimi K2 Thinking
Kimi K2 Thinking leads, 22.0 against 18.2.
Same board, both measured
Agentic work
AA Agentic Index
No call
Only Qwen3.6 35B A3B has a AA Agentic Index result, 13.1.
Directional only
Reasoning
GPQA Diamond
No call
Only Kimi K2 Thinking has a GPQA Diamond result, 78.5%.
Directional only
Math
AIME
No call
Only Kimi K2 Thinking has a AIME result, 85.4%.
Directional only
Knowledge
MMLU Pro
No call
Only Kimi K2 Thinking has a MMLU Pro result, 81.1%.
Directional only
Web design
Design Arena: websites
No call
Only Kimi K2 Thinking has a Design Arena: websites result, 1113.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
No call
Both take 262K tokens.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Qwen3.6 35B A3B
Kimi K2 Thinking $0.0019, Qwen3.6 35B A3B $0.0006 per turn.
List prices
Cost per solved task
One SWE-bench Verified task, solved
No call
Only Kimi K2 Thinking has the number, $0.61.
Directional only
At a glance
- Coding index
- Kimi K2 Thinking not benchmarked, Qwen3.6 35B A3B not benchmarked.
- Widest category
- Coding, 7.7 points apart on average over 3 shared benchmarks.
- Widest single gap
- Terminal-Bench: Kimi K2 Thinking 35.7% against Qwen3.6 35B A3B 24.6%, 11.1 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Kimi K2 Thinking $2.50 against Qwen3.6 35B A3B $1.00 per million output tokens, 2.5x apart.
- Context window
- Both take 262K tokens.
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 Thinking | Bars | Qwen3.6 35B A3B | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 2 | 1 | ||
| Intelligence | 2 | 0 | ||
| Agentic work | 0 | 1 | ||
| Reasoning | 1 | 1 | ||
| General | 2 | 0 | ||
| All shared boards | 7 | 3 |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index21
| Benchmark | Kimi K2 Thinking | Qwen3.6 35B A3B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified | 63.4% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| AA Coding Index | Not measured | 41.9 | Only Qwen3.6 35B A3B measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) | 63.1% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI) | 60.2% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) | 85.3% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| SciCode | Not measured | 36.6% | Only Qwen3.6 35B A3B measured |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | 31.1% | 34.8% | Qwen3.6 35B A3B |
| Terminal-Bench | 35.7% | 24.6% | Kimi K2 Thinking |
| WeirdML | 42.8% | 34.5% | Kimi K2 Thinking |
| ALE-Bench | 597.5 | Not measured | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 29 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
| Benchmark | Kimi K2 Thinking | Qwen3.6 35B A3B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 22.0 | 18.2 | Kimi K2 Thinking |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 145.8 | 143.7 | Kimi K2 Thinking |
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | Kimi K2 Thinking | Qwen3.6 35B A3B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Agentic Index | Not measured | 13.1 | Only Qwen3.6 35B A3B measured |
| τ²-Bench Telecom | 93.0% | 95.3% | Qwen3.6 35B A3B |
| METR time horizons | 59.2% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index11
| Benchmark | Kimi K2 Thinking | Qwen3.6 35B A3B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 78.5% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 83.8% | 84.1% | Qwen3.6 35B A3B |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 23.8% | 22.2% | Kimi K2 Thinking |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | Not measured | 84.8% | Only Qwen3.6 35B A3B measured |
| Mystery game puzzles | Not measured | 22.0% | Only Qwen3.6 35B A3B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 17 boards here | |||
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Kimi K2 Thinking | Qwen3.6 35B A3B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AIME | 85.4% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| MGSM (Vals AI) | 90.2% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| AA Math Index | 94.7 | Not measured | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run) | 94.7% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| OTIS Mock AIME | Not measured | 86.7% | Only Qwen3.6 35B A3B measured |
| FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3 | Not measured | 20.4% | Only Qwen3.6 35B A3B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here | |||
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Kimi K2 Thinking | Qwen3.6 35B A3B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro | 81.1% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| LegalBench (Vals AI) | 80.2% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| CaseLaw (Vals AI) | 65.7% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| CorpFin (Vals AI) | 60.6% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| TaxEval (Vals AI) | 71.7% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| MedQA (Vals AI) | 92.6% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run) | 84.8% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here | |||
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
| Benchmark | Kimi K2 Thinking | Qwen3.6 35B A3B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: websites | 1113 | Not measured | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here | |||
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
| Benchmark | Kimi K2 Thinking | Qwen3.6 35B A3B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| IFBench | 68.1% | 64.4% | Kimi K2 Thinking |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 72.0% | 71.7% | Kimi K2 Thinking |
| DTBench | Not measured | 73.9% | Only Qwen3.6 35B A3B measured |
| LMCA | Not measured | 29.7% | Only Qwen3.6 35B A3B measured |
| CL-bench | 17.6% | Not measured | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| Surface Evolver Bench | Not measured | 44.4% | Only Qwen3.6 35B A3B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 40 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Kimi K2 Thinking | Qwen3.6 35B A3B | 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
Qwen3.6 35B A3B costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Qwen3.6 35B A3B costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Qwen3.6 35B A3B 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 Thinking | Qwen3.6 35B A3B |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Moonshot AI | Qwen |
| Weights | Open weights | Open weights |
| Released | November 6, 2025 | April 27, 2026 |
| Context window | 262K | 262K |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.60 | $0.10 |
| Output $/Mtok | $2.50 | $1.00 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | Not benchmarked |
| Independent measurements behind it | 1 | 0 |
| Cost per solved task | $0.61 | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Kimi K2 Thinking better than Qwen3.6 35B A3B for coding?
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Kimi K2 Thinking for work measured by Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) or τ²-Bench Telecom, where it leads.
Which is cheaper, Kimi K2 Thinking or Qwen3.6 35B A3B?
Kimi K2 Thinking costs $0.60 per million input tokens and $2.50 per million output tokens; Qwen3.6 35B A3B costs $0.10 and $1.00. Cost per solved task is known for Kimi K2 Thinking only.
Which has the bigger context window, Kimi K2 Thinking or Qwen3.6 35B A3B?
Neither: both take 262K tokens.
How many benchmarks is the Kimi K2 Thinking vs Qwen3.6 35B A3B comparison based on?
10 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Kimi K2 Thinking's coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark and Qwen3.6 35B A3B's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.