Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Kimi K2 Thinking vs Qwen3 Coder Next

Updated October 21, 2026. 8 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.

Kimi K2 ThinkingMoonshot AI
Coding
No data
Overall
22.0
Output $/M
$2.50
8
Qwen3 Coder NextQwen
Coding
No data
Overall
9.2
Output $/M
$0.80
0
vs boards won of 8 shared

Decision reading

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Compare them on price, context and the boards below.

Shared results
8
Kimi K2 Thinking only
22
Qwen3 Coder Next only
3
Like-for-like categories
5 of 9

Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results only one model has describe coverage, not superiority.

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.

At a glance

Coding index
Kimi K2 Thinking not benchmarked, Qwen3 Coder Next not benchmarked.
Widest category
General, 28.9 points apart on average over 2 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
IFBench: Kimi K2 Thinking 68.1% against Qwen3 Coder Next 35.2%, 32.9 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Kimi K2 Thinking $2.50 against Qwen3 Coder Next $0.80 per million output tokens, 3.1x 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.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryKimi K2 ThinkingBarsQwen3 Coder NextTies
Coding20
Intelligence10
Agentic work10
Reasoning20
General20
All shared boards80
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index20
Coding benchmarks for Kimi K2 Thinking and Qwen3 Coder Next
BenchmarkKimi K2 ThinkingQwen3 Coder NextLeader
SWE-bench Verified63.4%Not measuredOnly Kimi K2 Thinking measured
AA Coding IndexNot measured36.2Only Qwen3 Coder Next measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)63.1%Not measuredOnly Kimi K2 Thinking measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)60.2%Not measuredOnly Kimi K2 Thinking measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)85.3%Not measuredOnly Kimi K2 Thinking measured
SciCodeNot measured36.2%Only Qwen3 Coder Next measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)31.1%18.2%Kimi K2 Thinking
Terminal-Bench35.7%Not measuredOnly Kimi K2 Thinking measured
WeirdML42.8%34.4%Kimi K2 Thinking
ALE-Bench597.5Not measuredOnly Kimi K2 Thinking measured
Neither model has a result on the other 28 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for Kimi K2 Thinking and Qwen3 Coder Next
BenchmarkKimi K2 ThinkingQwen3 Coder NextLeader
AA Intelligence Index22.09.2Kimi K2 Thinking
Epoch Capabilities Index145.8Not measuredOnly Kimi K2 Thinking measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Agentic work benchmarks for Kimi K2 Thinking and Qwen3 Coder Next
BenchmarkKimi K2 ThinkingQwen3 Coder NextLeader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured0.9Only Qwen3 Coder Next measured
τ²-Bench Telecom93.0%79.5%Kimi K2 Thinking
METR time horizons59.2%Not measuredOnly Kimi K2 Thinking measured
Neither model has a result on the other 36 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Reasoning benchmarks for Kimi K2 Thinking and Qwen3 Coder Next
BenchmarkKimi K2 ThinkingQwen3 Coder NextLeader
GPQA Diamond78.5%Not measuredOnly Kimi K2 Thinking measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)83.8%73.7%Kimi K2 Thinking
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)23.8%10.1%Kimi K2 Thinking
Neither model has a result on the other 18 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for Kimi K2 Thinking and Qwen3 Coder Next
BenchmarkKimi K2 ThinkingQwen3 Coder NextLeader
AIME85.4%Not measuredOnly Kimi K2 Thinking measured
MGSM (Vals AI)90.2%Not measuredOnly Kimi K2 Thinking measured
AA Math Index94.7Not measuredOnly Kimi K2 Thinking measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)94.7%Not measuredOnly Kimi K2 Thinking measured
Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for Kimi K2 Thinking and Qwen3 Coder Next
BenchmarkKimi K2 ThinkingQwen3 Coder NextLeader
MMLU Pro81.1%Not measuredOnly Kimi K2 Thinking measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)80.2%Not measuredOnly Kimi K2 Thinking measured
CaseLaw (Vals AI)65.7%Not measuredOnly Kimi K2 Thinking measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)60.6%Not measuredOnly Kimi K2 Thinking measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)71.7%Not measuredOnly Kimi K2 Thinking measured
MedQA (Vals AI)92.6%Not measuredOnly Kimi K2 Thinking measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)84.8%Not measuredOnly Kimi K2 Thinking measured
Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Kimi K2 Thinking and Qwen3 Coder Next
BenchmarkKimi K2 ThinkingQwen3 Coder NextLeader
Design Arena: websites1113Not measuredOnly 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
General benchmarks for Kimi K2 Thinking and Qwen3 Coder Next
BenchmarkKimi K2 ThinkingQwen3 Coder NextLeader
IFBench68.1%35.2%Kimi K2 Thinking
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)72.0%47.0%Kimi K2 Thinking
CL-bench17.6%Not measuredOnly Kimi K2 Thinking 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
Image generation benchmarks for Kimi K2 Thinking and Qwen3 Coder Next
BenchmarkKimi K2 ThinkingQwen3 Coder NextLeader
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 Thinking$0.0019Fits in one request
Qwen3 Coder Next$0.0005Fits in one request

Qwen3 Coder Next costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Kimi K2 Thinking$0.037Fits in one request
Qwen3 Coder Next$0.0084Fits in one request

Qwen3 Coder Next costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Kimi K2 Thinking$0.145Fits in one request
Qwen3 Coder Next$0.032Fits in one request

Qwen3 Coder Next 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.

Specifications of Kimi K2 Thinking and Qwen3 Coder Next
SpecificationMoonshotAI Kimi K2 ThinkingQwen3 Coder Next
MakerMoonshot AIQwen
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedNovember 6, 2025February 4, 2026
Context window262K262K
Input $/Mtok$0.60$0.12
Output $/Mtok$2.50$0.80
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it10
Cost per solved task$0.61Not computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Kimi K2 Thinking better than Qwen3 Coder Next for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Compare them on price, context and the boards below.

Which is cheaper, Kimi K2 Thinking or Qwen3 Coder Next?

Kimi K2 Thinking costs $0.60 per million input tokens and $2.50 per million output tokens; Qwen3 Coder Next costs $0.12 and $0.80. Cost per solved task is known for Kimi K2 Thinking only.

Which has the bigger context window, Kimi K2 Thinking or Qwen3 Coder Next?

Neither: both take 262K tokens.

How many benchmarks is the Kimi K2 Thinking vs Qwen3 Coder Next comparison based on?

8 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Kimi K2 Thinking's coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark and Qwen3 Coder Next's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next