Model comparison
Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) vs Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)
Head-to-head evidence from 12 shared benchmark results across 5 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) #57 (Estimated); Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) #53 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) and Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) share 12 comparable benchmark results. 3 of 8 categories are comparable. 15 results are unique to Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning); 9 to Qwen 3.6 Max (preview).
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 12
- Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) only
- 15
- Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) only
- 9
- Comparable categories
- 3 / 8
Pick Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) only becomes the better choice if coding is the priority.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 12 shared benchmark results across 5 evidence categories; 3 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) has the cleaner BenchAlign overall profile here, landing at 59.72 versus 59.35. It is a real lead, but still close enough that category-level strengths matter more than the headline number.
Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)'s sharpest advantage is in agentic, where it averages 65.4 against 55. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is Terminal-Bench 2.0, 50.8% to 65.4%. Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) does hit back in coding, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) gives you the larger context window at 256K, compared with 128K for Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning).
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 | Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) | Δ | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning)76.8 | Margin← 25.8 | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)51.0 |
| Knowledge | Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning)87.2 | Margin← 13.3 | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)73.9 |
| Agentic | Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning)55.0 | Margin→ 10.4 | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)65.4 |
| Math | Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning)Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)18.4 |
| Multimodal | Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning)78.5 | MarginNo overlap | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)Not measured |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
Terminal-Bench 2.0
AgenticA 50.8%B 65.4%Winner: Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)Δ 14.6Terminal-Bench 2.0: Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) scored 50.8%; Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) scored 65.4%. Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning)$0.6 input / $3 output | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)Not available | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning)Not available | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)Not available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning)Not available | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)Not available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning)128K | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)256K | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticQwen 3.6 Max (preview) wins10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 50.8% | 65.4% | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) leads |
| BrowseCompSource | 60.6% | — | Not comparable |
| APEX-Agents-AASource | 11.5% | — | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 95.9% | 95.9% | Tie |
| Gert LabsSource | 32.58% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 21.7% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 25.4% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 1009 | — | Not comparable |
| QwenClawBenchSource | — | 59.0% | Not comparable |
| QwenWebBenchSource | — | 1532 | Not comparable |
CodingKimi K2.5 (Reasoning) wins8 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 76.8% | — | Not comparable |
| Vibe Code BenchSource | 17.54% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 49.0% | 46.9% | Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) leads |
| AA Coding IndexSource | 46.8% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench ProSource | — | 57.3% | Not comparable |
| SciCodeSource | — | 47% | Not comparable |
| NL2RepoSource | — | 42.9% | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 65.4% | Not comparable |
Reasoning2 benchmarks
KnowledgeKimi K2.5 (Reasoning) wins9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 87.6% | — | Not comparable |
| MMLU-ProSource | 87.1% | — | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 35.4% | 40.0% | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 87.9% | 88.8% | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) leads |
| AA-HLESource | 29.4% | 28.9% | Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -8.1% | 10.2% | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 34.3% | 37.7% | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 64.6% | 44.2% | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) leads |
| SuperGPQASource | — | 73.9% | Not comparable |
Math3 benchmarks
Multimodal3 benchmarks
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 70.2% | 76.6% | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) leads |
Frequently Asked Questions (4)
Which is better, Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) or Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)?
Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 59.72 to 59.35. The biggest single separator in this matchup is Terminal-Bench 2.0, where the scores are 50.8% and 65.4%.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) or Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)?
Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 87.2 versus 73.9. Inside this category, AA-Omniscience Hallucination Rate is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for coding, Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) or Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)?
Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 76.8 versus 51. Inside this category, AA-SciCode is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for agentic tasks, Kimi K2.5 (Reasoning) or Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)?
Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 65.4 versus 55. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Related Comparisons
Choose a model with this week’s evidence
Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.
One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.