ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Nov 2, 2026

Fugu vs Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed vs Qwen 3.8 Max Prime

Too close to call on our weighted score (Fugu 66, Qwen 3.8 Max Prime 66, Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed 57). The right pick depends on what you value most.

  1. Sakana AI

    Fugu

    Released Jun 15, 2026

    66/100
    • ECI—
    • Price—
    • Context1M
  2. Moonshot AI

    Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed

    Released Jun 12, 2026

    57/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$1.90 / $8.00
    • Context262K
  3. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen 3.8 Max Prime

    Released Sep 23, 2026New

    66/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$4.00 / $12.00
    • Context1M
01 — Verdict

Too close to call

It is close. Our weighted score puts them within a point (Fugu 66/100, Qwen 3.8 Max Prime 66/100, Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed 57/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed on price. The score weighs inputs & features 60%, context window 40%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.

  • CapabilityNot enough dataNo independent benchmark covers every model here yet
  • Lowest priceKimi K2.7 Code HighspeedKimi K2.7 Code Highspeed $3.42 · Qwen 3.8 Max Prime $6.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend) · Fugu unpriced
  • Longest contextFugu and Qwen 3.8 Max PrimeFugu 1,000,000 · Qwen 3.8 Max Prime 1,000,000 · Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed 262,144 tokens
  • Widest inputsKimi K2.7 Code Highspeed and Qwen 3.8 Max PrimeFugu: Text, Images · Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed: Text, Images, Video · Qwen 3.8 Max Prime: Text, Images, Video
  • Self-hostingKimi K2.7 Code HighspeedPublishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightFuguKimi K2.7 Code HighspeedQwen 3.8 Max Prime
Inputs & features60%707070
Context window40%603760
Overall100%66/10057/10066/100

Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability and price. The remaining weights were rescaled.

02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

Fugu vs Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed vs Qwen 3.8 Max Prime specifications side by side
SpecificationFuguSakana AIKimi K2.7 Code HighspeedMoonshot AIQwen 3.8 Max PrimeAlibaba (Qwen)
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)———
ECI rank———
Price per million tokens
Input—$1.90 (best)$4.00
Output—$8.00 (best)$12.00
Cached input———
Blended (3:1)—$3.42 (best)$6.00
Long-context rate—Same rateSame rate
Price source—Median of 12 providersMedian of 5 providers
Limits
Context window1,000,000 tokens (best)262,144 tokens1,000,000 tokens (best)
Max output—262,144 tokens (best)131,072 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesYesYesYes
PDFsNoNoNo
AudioNoNoNo
VideoNoYesYes
ReasoningYeshigh · xhighYesYes
Tool callingYesYesYes
Structured outputYesNoNo
Availability
WeightsProprietaryOpenProprietary
API model IDfugu——
API providers112 (best)5
ReleasedJun 15, 2026Jun 12, 2026Sep 23, 2026
Knowledge cutoff—Jan 2025—
03 — Cost

What would a month cost?

Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.

  • Fugu—
  • Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed$35.00
  • Qwen 3.8 Max Prime$64.00
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Fugu, Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed or Qwen 3.8 Max Prime?

It is close. Our weighted score puts them within a point (Fugu 66/100, Qwen 3.8 Max Prime 66/100, Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed 57/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed on price. The score weighs inputs & features 60%, context window 40%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.

Which is cheaper, Fugu, Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed or Qwen 3.8 Max Prime?

Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed is cheaper at $1.90 input / $8.00 output per million tokens (median across 12 API providers). Qwen 3.8 Max Prime costs $4.00 input / $12.00 output per million tokens (median across 5 API providers). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $3.42 per million tokens for Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed versus $6.00 for Qwen 3.8 Max Prime (1.8× as much). Fugu has no published per-token price.

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Fugu has not been scored yet, Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed has not been scored yet and Qwen 3.8 Max Prime has not been scored yet.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Fugu, Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed and Qwen 3.8 Max Prime yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. All three support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Fugu and Qwen 3.8 Max Prime have the largest context windows (1,000,000 and 1,000,000 tokens), against 262,144 for Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed. Maximum output per response: Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed up to 262,144, Qwen 3.8 Max Prime up to 131,072 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Fugu accepts text and images; Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed accepts text, images and video; Qwen 3.8 Max Prime accepts text, images and video. Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Fugu and Qwen 3.8 Max Prime is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Qwen 3.8 Max Prime is the newest, released Sep 23, 2026. Fugu came out Jun 15, 2026; Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed came out Jun 12, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed Jan 2025.

How do you decide the winner?

Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Nov 2, 2026.