Qwen3.6 Plus vs Gemini 2.5 Flash vs Kimi K2.5
Too close to call on our weighted score (Gemini 2.5 Flash 66, Qwen3.6 Plus 66, Kimi K2.5 62). The right pick depends on what you value most.
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen3.6 Plus
66/100- ECI147.8
- Price$0.50 / $3.00
- Context1M
GoogleGemini 2.5 Flash
66/100- ECI140.6
- Price$0.30 / $2.50
- Context1.05M
Moonshot AIKimi K2.5
62/100- ECI148.1
- Price$0.60 / $3.00
- Context262K
Too close to call
It is close. Our weighted score puts them within a point (Gemini 2.5 Flash 66/100, Qwen3.6 Plus 66/100, Kimi K2.5 62/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Kimi K2.5 for raw capability, Gemini 2.5 Flash on price and Gemini 2.5 Flash for long inputs. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
- CapabilityKimi K2.5Capabilities Index (ECI): Kimi K2.5 148.1 · Qwen3.6 Plus 147.8 · Gemini 2.5 Flash 140.6
- Lowest priceGemini 2.5 FlashGemini 2.5 Flash $0.85 · Qwen3.6 Plus $1.13 · Kimi K2.5 $1.20 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextGemini 2.5 FlashGemini 2.5 Flash 1,048,576 · Qwen3.6 Plus 1,000,000 · Kimi K2.5 262,144 tokens
- Widest inputsGemini 2.5 FlashQwen3.6 Plus: Text, Images, Video · Gemini 2.5 Flash: Text, Images, PDFs, Audio, Video · Kimi K2.5: Text, Images, Video
- Self-hostingKimi K2.5Publishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | Qwen3.6 Plus | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Kimi K2.5 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI) | 50% | 74 | 65 | 74 |
| Price | 25% | 45 | 51 | 44 |
| Inputs & features | 15% | 80 | 100 | 70 |
| Context window | 10% | 60 | 61 | 37 |
| Overall | 100% | 66/100 | 66/100 | 62/100 |
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | Qwen3.6 PlusAlibaba (Qwen) | Gemini 2.5 FlashGoogle | Kimi K2.5Moonshot AI |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | 147.8 | 140.6 | 148.1 (best) |
| ECI rank | #69 of 165 | #110 of 165 | #68 of 165 (best) |
| GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions | 88.4% (best) | — | 87.6% |
| FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics | 38.3% | — | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics | 93.3% (best) | — | 92.2% |
| SWE-bench VerifiedFixing real GitHub issues | 57.9% | — | 73.8% (best) |
| SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions | 44.1% (best) | — | 34.3% |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $0.50 | $0.30 (best) | $0.60 |
| Output | $3.00 | $2.50 (best) | $3.00 |
| Cached input | $0.05 | $0.03 (best) | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $1.13 | $0.85 (best) | $1.20 |
| Long-context rate | Over 256K: $2.00 / $6.00 | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Alibaba API | Official Google API | Median of 33 providers |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 1,000,000 tokens | 1,048,576 tokens (best) | 262,144 tokens |
| Max output | 65,536 tokens | 65,536 tokens | 262,144 tokens (best) |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| PDFs | No | Yes | No |
| Audio | No | Yes | No |
| Video | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | Yes | Yes | No |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary | Open |
| API model ID | qwen3.6-plus | gemini-2.5-flash | — |
| API providers | 22 | 32 | 33 (best) |
| Released | Apr 2, 2026 | Jun 17, 2025 | Jan 27, 2026 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Apr 2025 | Jan 2025 | 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.
- Qwen3.6 Plus$11.00
- Gemini 2.5 Flash$8.00
- Kimi K2.5$12.00
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Qwen3.6 Plus, Gemini 2.5 Flash or Kimi K2.5?
It is close. Our weighted score puts them within a point (Gemini 2.5 Flash 66/100, Qwen3.6 Plus 66/100, Kimi K2.5 62/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Kimi K2.5 for raw capability, Gemini 2.5 Flash on price and Gemini 2.5 Flash for long inputs. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
Which is cheaper, Qwen3.6 Plus, Gemini 2.5 Flash or Kimi K2.5?
Gemini 2.5 Flash is cheaper at $0.30 input / $2.50 output per million tokens (official Google API price). Qwen3.6 Plus costs $0.50 input / $3.00 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price); Kimi K2.5 costs $0.60 input / $3.00 output per million tokens (median across 33 API providers). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.85 per million tokens for Gemini 2.5 Flash versus $1.13 for Qwen3.6 Plus (1.3× as much) and $1.20 for Kimi K2.5 (1.4× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
Kimi K2.5 scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Kimi K2.5 148.1 (#68 of 165), Qwen3.6 Plus 147.8 (#69 of 165) and Gemini 2.5 Flash 140.6 (#110 of 165). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (146.3–149.5 vs 145.8–149.6), so treat the gap as small.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Gemini 2.5 Flash yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Kimi K2.5 leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. All three support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
Gemini 2.5 Flash has the largest context window at 1,048,576 tokens, against 1,000,000 for Qwen3.6 Plus and 262,144 for Kimi K2.5. Maximum output per response: Qwen3.6 Plus up to 65,536, Gemini 2.5 Flash up to 65,536, Kimi K2.5 up to 262,144 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Qwen3.6 Plus accepts text, images and video; Gemini 2.5 Flash accepts text, images, PDFs, audio and video; Kimi K2.5 accepts text, images and video. Gemini 2.5 Flash handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
Kimi K2.5 publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Qwen3.6 Plus and Gemini 2.5 Flash is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Qwen3.6 Plus is the newest, released Apr 2, 2026. Kimi K2.5 came out Jan 27, 2026; Gemini 2.5 Flash came out Jun 17, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Qwen3.6 Plus Apr 2025, Gemini 2.5 Flash Jan 2025, Kimi K2.5 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.
Related comparisons
- Qwen3.6 Plus vs Grok 4.3xAI · ECI 149.0
- Qwen3.6 Plus vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55BNVIDIA · ECI 146.0
- Qwen3.6 Plus vs GPT-5.4 miniOpenAI · ECI 148.8
- Gemini 2.5 Flash vs DeepSeek R1 0528DeepSeek · ECI 141.2
- Gemini 2.5 Flash vs Kimi K2 InstructMoonshot AI · ECI 139.9
- Gemini 2.5 Flash vs Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507Alibaba (Qwen) · ECI 143.8
