ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Qwen3.6 35B-A3B vs Kimi K2.7 Code

Qwen3.6 35B-A3B comes out ahead, 68 to 64 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. Our pick

    Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3.6 35B-A3B

    Released Apr 17, 2026

    68/100
    • ECI143.9
    • Price$0.248 / $1.49
    • Context262K
    Full specs Remove Qwen3.6 35B-A3B

  2. Moonshot AI

    Kimi K2.7 Code

    Released Jun 12, 2026

    64/100
    • ECI150.0
    • Price$0.95 / $4.00
    • Context262K
    Full specs Remove Kimi K2.7 Code

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

Qwen3.6 35B-A3B is our pick

Qwen3.6 35B-A3B is the better all-round choice, scoring 68/100 against Kimi K2.7 Code (64). It leads on price and inputs & features. Kimi K2.7 Code wins on capability. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityKimi K2.7 CodeCapabilities Index (ECI): Kimi K2.7 Code 150.0 · Qwen3.6 35B-A3B 143.9
  • Lowest priceQwen3.6 35B-A3BQwen3.6 35B-A3B $0.557 · Kimi K2.7 Code $1.71 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextAbout the sameQwen3.6 35B-A3B 262,144 · Kimi K2.7 Code 262,144 tokens
  • Widest inputsQwen3.6 35B-A3BQwen3.6 35B-A3B: Text, Images, Audio, Video · Kimi K2.7 Code: Text, Images, Video
  • Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
How the score is built
MeasureWeightQwen3.6 35B-A3BKimi K2.7 Code
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%7078
Price25%6239
Inputs & features15%9080
Context window10%3737
Overall100%68/10064/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

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

Qwen3.6 35B-A3B vs Kimi K2.7 Code specifications side by side
SpecificationQwen3.6 35B-A3BAlibaba (Qwen)Kimi K2.7 CodeMoonshot AI
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)143.9150.0 (best)
ECI rank#83 of 148#49 of 148 (best)
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions84.9%87.9% (best)
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics20.4%54.0% (best)
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics86.7%95.6% (best)
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions—36.5%
Price per million tokens
Input$0.248 (best)$0.95
Output$1.49 (best)$4.00
Cached input—$0.19
Blended (3:1)$0.557 (best)$1.71
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceOfficial Alibaba APIOfficial Moonshot AI API
Limits
Context window262,144 tokens262,144 tokens
Max output65,536 tokens262,144 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesYesYes
PDFsNoNo
AudioYesNo
VideoYesYes
ReasoningYesYes
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputYesYes
Availability
WeightsOpenOpen
API model IDqwen3.6-35b-a3bkimi-k2.7-code
API providers3451 (best)
ReleasedApr 17, 2026Jun 12, 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.

  • Qwen3.6 35B-A3B$5.45
  • Kimi K2.7 Code$17.50
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Qwen3.6 35B-A3B or Kimi K2.7 Code?

Qwen3.6 35B-A3B is the better all-round choice, scoring 68/100 against Kimi K2.7 Code (64). It leads on price and inputs & features. Kimi K2.7 Code wins on capability. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, Qwen3.6 35B-A3B or Kimi K2.7 Code?

Qwen3.6 35B-A3B is cheaper at $0.248 input / $1.49 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). Kimi K2.7 Code costs $0.95 input / $4.00 output per million tokens (official Moonshot AI API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.557 per million tokens for Qwen3.6 35B-A3B versus $1.71 for Kimi K2.7 Code (3.1× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

Kimi K2.7 Code scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Kimi K2.7 Code 150.0 (#49 of 148) and Qwen3.6 35B-A3B 143.9 (#83 of 148). Their confidence ranges do not overlap (148.1–151.8 vs 141.2–146.0), so the gap is a real one. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — Kimi K2.7 Code 87.9%, Qwen3.6 35B-A3B 84.9%; FrontierMath Tiers 1–3 — Kimi K2.7 Code 54.0%, Qwen3.6 35B-A3B 20.4%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — Kimi K2.7 Code 95.6%, Qwen3.6 35B-A3B 86.7%.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Qwen3.6 35B-A3B and Kimi K2.7 Code yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Kimi K2.7 Code leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.6 35B-A3B and Kimi K2.7 Code share the same 262,144-token context window. Maximum output per response: Qwen3.6 35B-A3B up to 65,536, Kimi K2.7 Code up to 262,144 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Qwen3.6 35B-A3B accepts text, images, audio and video; Kimi K2.7 Code accepts text, images and video. Qwen3.6 35B-A3B handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Yes, both publish their weights, so you can self-host them.

Which is newer?

Kimi K2.7 Code is the newest, released Jun 12, 2026. Qwen3.6 35B-A3B came out Apr 17, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: Kimi K2.7 Code 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