ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Inkling Small vs Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed vs Qwen3.8 27B

Inkling Small comes out ahead, 62 to 57 and 44 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. Our pick

    Thinking Machines

    Inkling Small

    Released Jul 30, 2026

    62/100
    • ECI150.2
    • Price$0.50 / $1.20
    • Context1.05M
    Full specs Remove Inkling Small

  2. Moonshot AI

    Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed

    Released Jun 12, 2026

    44/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$1.90 / $8.00
    • Context262K
    Full specs Remove Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed

  3. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3.8 27B

    Released Aug 14, 2026

    57/100
    • ECI149.4
    • Price$0.40 / $2.50
    • Context262K
    Full specs Remove Qwen3.8 27B
01 — Verdict

Inkling Small is our pick

Inkling Small is the better all-round choice, scoring 62/100 against Qwen3.8 27B (57) and Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed (44). It leads on price and context window. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. 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 priceInkling SmallInkling Small $0.675 · Qwen3.8 27B $0.925 · Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed $3.42 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextInkling SmallInkling Small 1,048,576 · Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed 262,144 · Qwen3.8 27B 262,144 tokens
  • Widest inputsSame inputsInkling Small: Text, Images, Audio · Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed: Text, Images, Video · Qwen3.8 27B: Text, Images, Video
  • Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
How the score is built
MeasureWeightInkling SmallKimi K2.7 Code HighspeedQwen3.8 27B
Price50%582551
Inputs & features30%708080
Context window20%613737
Overall100%62/10044/10057/100

Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. 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.

Inkling Small vs Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed vs Qwen3.8 27B specifications side by side
SpecificationInkling SmallThinking MachinesKimi K2.7 Code HighspeedMoonshot AIQwen3.8 27BAlibaba (Qwen)
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)150.2 (best)—149.4
ECI rank#47 of 148 (best)—#53 of 148
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions88.5%——
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics46.3%——
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics90.0%——
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions19.1%——
Price per million tokens
Input$0.50$1.90$0.40 (best)
Output$1.20 (best)$8.00$2.50
Cached input———
Blended (3:1)$0.675 (best)$3.42$0.925
Long-context rateSame rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceMedian of 11 providersMedian of 11 providersMedian of 39 providers
Limits
Context window1,048,576 tokens (best)262,144 tokens262,144 tokens
Max output1,048,576 tokens (best)262,144 tokens32,768 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesYesYesYes
PDFsNoNoNo
AudioYesNoNo
VideoNoYesYes
ReasoningYesYesYes
Tool callingYesYesYes
Structured outputNoYesYes
Availability
WeightsOpenApache-2.0OpenOpen
API model ID———
API providers111141 (best)
ReleasedJul 30, 2026Jun 12, 2026Aug 14, 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.

  • Inkling Small$7.40
  • Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed$35.00
  • Qwen3.8 27B$9.00
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Inkling Small, Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed or Qwen3.8 27B?

Inkling Small is the better all-round choice, scoring 62/100 against Qwen3.8 27B (57) and Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed (44). It leads on price and context window. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.

Which is cheaper, Inkling Small, Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed or Qwen3.8 27B?

Inkling Small is cheaper at $0.50 input / $1.20 output per million tokens (median across 11 API providers). Qwen3.8 27B costs $0.40 input / $2.50 output per million tokens (median across 39 API providers); Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed costs $1.90 input / $8.00 output per million tokens (median across 11 API providers). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.675 per million tokens for Inkling Small versus $0.925 for Qwen3.8 27B (1.4× as much) and $3.42 for Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed (5.1× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Inkling Small has an ECI of 150.2, Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed has not been scored yet and Qwen3.8 27B has an ECI of 149.4.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Inkling Small, Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed and Qwen3.8 27B 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?

Inkling Small has the largest context window at 1,048,576 tokens, against 262,144 for Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed and 262,144 for Qwen3.8 27B. Maximum output per response: Inkling Small up to 1,048,576, Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed up to 262,144, Qwen3.8 27B up to 32,768 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Inkling Small accepts text, images and audio; Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed accepts text, images and video; Qwen3.8 27B accepts text, images and video. They handle the same number of input types.

Are any of these open source?

Yes, all three publish their weights (Apache-2.0), so you can self-host them.

Which is newer?

Qwen3.8 27B is the newest, released Aug 14, 2026. Inkling Small came out Jul 30, 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 Oct 4, 2026.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons