Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo vs Qwen3.5 Plus vs GPT-5.1 Chat
Qwen3.5 Plus comes out ahead, 66 to 52 and 36 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.
Moonshot AIKimi K2 Thinking Turbo
36/100- ECI—
- Price—
- Context262K
- Our pick
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen3.5 Plus
66/100- ECI146.8
- Price$0.40 / $2.40
- Context1M
OpenAIGPT-5.1 Chat
52/100- ECI—
- Price$1.25 / $10.00
- Context128K
Qwen3.5 Plus is our pick
Qwen3.5 Plus is the better all-round choice, scoring 66/100 against GPT-5.1 Chat (52) and Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo (36). It leads on context window. 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 priceQwen3.5 PlusQwen3.5 Plus $0.90 · GPT-5.1 Chat $3.44 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend) · Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo unpriced
- Longest contextQwen3.5 PlusQwen3.5 Plus 1,000,000 · Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo 262,144 · GPT-5.1 Chat 128,000 tokens
- Widest inputsQwen3.5 PlusKimi K2 Thinking Turbo: Text · Qwen3.5 Plus: Text, Images, Video · GPT-5.1 Chat: Text, Images
- Self-hostingKimi K2 Thinking TurboPublishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo | Qwen3.5 Plus | GPT-5.1 Chat |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Inputs & features | 60% | 35 | 70 | 70 |
| Context window | 40% | 37 | 60 | 24 |
| Overall | 100% | 36/100 | 66/100 | 52/100 |
Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability and price. 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 Thinking TurboMoonshot AI | Qwen3.5 PlusAlibaba (Qwen) | GPT-5.1 ChatOpenAI |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | 146.8 | — |
| ECI rank | — | #65 of 148 | — |
| GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions | — | 84.9% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics | — | 86.7% | — |
| SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions | — | 25.4% | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | — | $0.40 (best) | $1.25 |
| Output | — | $2.40 (best) | $10.00 |
| Cached input | — | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | — | $0.90 (best) | $3.44 |
| Long-context rate | — | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | — | Official Alibaba API | Median of 2 providers |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 262,144 tokens | 1,000,000 tokens (best) | 128,000 tokens |
| Max output | 262,144 tokens (best) | 65,536 tokens | 16,384 tokens |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | Yes | Yes |
| PDFs | No | No | No |
| Audio | No | No | No |
| Video | No | Yes | No |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | No | Yes |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Open | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| API model ID | — | qwen3.5-plus | — |
| API providers | — | 10 (best) | 2 |
| Released | Nov 6, 2025 | Feb 16, 2026 | Nov 13, 2025 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Aug 2024 | Apr 2025 | Sep 30, 2024 |
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 Thinking Turbo—
- Qwen3.5 Plus$8.80
- GPT-5.1 Chat$32.50
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo, Qwen3.5 Plus or GPT-5.1 Chat?
Qwen3.5 Plus is the better all-round choice, scoring 66/100 against GPT-5.1 Chat (52) and Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo (36). It leads on context window. 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, Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo, Qwen3.5 Plus or GPT-5.1 Chat?
Qwen3.5 Plus is cheaper at $0.40 input / $2.40 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). GPT-5.1 Chat costs $1.25 input / $10.00 output per million tokens (median across 2 API providers). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.90 per million tokens for Qwen3.5 Plus versus $3.44 for GPT-5.1 Chat (3.8× as much). Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo has no published per-token price.
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo has not been scored yet, Qwen3.5 Plus has an ECI of 146.8 and GPT-5.1 Chat has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo, Qwen3.5 Plus and GPT-5.1 Chat 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?
Qwen3.5 Plus has the largest context window at 1,000,000 tokens, against 262,144 for Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo and 128,000 for GPT-5.1 Chat. Maximum output per response: Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo up to 262,144, Qwen3.5 Plus up to 65,536, GPT-5.1 Chat up to 16,384 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo accepts text; Qwen3.5 Plus accepts text, images and video; GPT-5.1 Chat accepts text and images. Qwen3.5 Plus handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Qwen3.5 Plus and GPT-5.1 Chat is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Qwen3.5 Plus is the newest, released Feb 16, 2026. GPT-5.1 Chat came out Nov 13, 2025; Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo came out Nov 6, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Kimi K2 Thinking Turbo Aug 2024, Qwen3.5 Plus Apr 2025, GPT-5.1 Chat Sep 30, 2024.
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.
