Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed vs Qwen3.5 Flash
Qwen3.5 Flash comes out ahead, 79 to 44 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.
Moonshot AIKimi K2.7 Code Highspeed
44/100- ECI—
- Price$1.90 / $8.00
- Context262K
- Our pick
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen3.5 Flash
79/100- ECI144.0
- Price$0.10 / $0.40
- Context1M
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
Qwen3.5 Flash is our pick
Qwen3.5 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 79/100 against 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 priceQwen3.5 FlashQwen3.5 Flash $0.175 · Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed $3.42 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextQwen3.5 FlashQwen3.5 Flash 1,000,000 · Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed 262,144 tokens
- Widest inputsSame inputsKimi K2.7 Code Highspeed: Text, Images, Video · Qwen3.5 Flash: Text, Images, Video
- Self-hostingKimi K2.7 Code HighspeedPublishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed | Qwen3.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 25 | 86 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 80 | 80 |
| Context window | 20% | 37 | 60 |
| Overall | 100% | 44/100 | 79/100 |
Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | Kimi K2.7 Code HighspeedMoonshot AI | Qwen3.5 FlashAlibaba (Qwen) |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | 144.0 |
| ECI rank | — | #82 of 148 |
| GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions | — | 82.3% |
| FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics | — | 18.3% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics | — | 84.4% |
| SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions | — | 20.3% |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $1.90 | $0.10 (best) |
| Output | $8.00 | $0.40 (best) |
| Cached input | — | $0.01 |
| Blended (3:1) | $3.42 | $0.175 (best) |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Median of 11 providers | Official Alibaba API |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 262,144 tokens | 1,000,000 tokens (best) |
| Max output | 262,144 tokens (best) | 65,536 tokens |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | Yes |
| PDFs | No | No |
| Audio | No | No |
| Video | Yes | Yes |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | Yes | Yes |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| API model ID | — | qwen3.5-flash |
| API providers | 11 (best) | 8 |
| Released | Jun 12, 2026 | Feb 23, 2026 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Jan 2025 | — |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed$35.00
- Qwen3.5 Flash$1.80
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed or Qwen3.5 Flash?
Qwen3.5 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 79/100 against 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, Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed or Qwen3.5 Flash?
Qwen3.5 Flash is cheaper at $0.10 input / $0.40 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). 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 $0.175 per million tokens for Qwen3.5 Flash versus $3.42 for Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed (20× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed has not been scored yet and Qwen3.5 Flash has an ECI of 144.0.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed and Qwen3.5 Flash yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen3.5 Flash has the largest context window at 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, Qwen3.5 Flash up to 65,536 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed accepts text, images and video; Qwen3.5 Flash accepts text, images and video. They handle the same number of input types.
Are any of these open source?
Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Qwen3.5 Flash is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed is the newest, released Jun 12, 2026. Qwen3.5 Flash came out Feb 23, 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.
Related comparisons
- Add Qwen3.8 Max PreviewThree-way comparison
- Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed vs Qwen3.8 Max PreviewAlibaba (Qwen)
- Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed vs Command A PlusCohere
- Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed vs ParetoUnbiased
- Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed vs Seed 2.1 ProByteDance Seed
- Qwen3.5 Flash vs Gemma 4 31B ITGoogle · ECI 142.8
- Qwen3.5 Flash vs DeepSeek V4 FlashDeepSeek · ECI 146.1
