ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Qwen3.7 Max vs Kimi K2.6 vs Gemini 3.5 Flash

Gemini 3.5 Flash comes out ahead, 69 to 65 and 58 on our weighted score, though Kimi K2.6 is 2× cheaper per token.

  1. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3.7 Max

    Released May 21, 2026

    58/100
    • ECI153.7
    • Price$2.50 / $7.50
    • Context1M
  2. Moonshot AI

    Kimi K2.6

    Released Apr 21, 2026

    65/100
    • ECI151.1
    • Price$0.95 / $4.00
    • Context262K
  3. Our pick

    Google

    Gemini 3.5 Flash

    Released May 19, 2026

    69/100
    • ECI154.5
    • Price$1.50 / $9.00
    • Context1.05M
01 — Verdict

Gemini 3.5 Flash is our pick

Gemini 3.5 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 69/100 against Kimi K2.6 (65) and Qwen3.7 Max (58). It leads on inputs & features. Kimi K2.6 wins on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityGemini 3.5 FlashCapabilities Index (ECI): Gemini 3.5 Flash 154.5 · Qwen3.7 Max 153.7 · Kimi K2.6 151.1
  • Lowest priceKimi K2.6Kimi K2.6 $1.71 · Gemini 3.5 Flash $3.38 · Qwen3.7 Max $3.75 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextGemini 3.5 FlashGemini 3.5 Flash 1,048,576 · Qwen3.7 Max 1,000,000 · Kimi K2.6 262,144 tokens
  • Widest inputsGemini 3.5 FlashQwen3.7 Max: Text · Kimi K2.6: Text, Images, Video · Gemini 3.5 Flash: Text, Images, PDFs, Audio, Video
  • Self-hostingKimi K2.6Publishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightQwen3.7 MaxKimi K2.6Gemini 3.5 Flash
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%837984
Price25%233925
Inputs & features15%3580100
Context window10%603761
Overall100%58/10065/10069/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

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

Qwen3.7 Max vs Kimi K2.6 vs Gemini 3.5 Flash specifications side by side
SpecificationQwen3.7 MaxAlibaba (Qwen)Kimi K2.6Moonshot AIGemini 3.5 FlashGoogle
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)153.7151.1154.5 (best)
ECI rank#37 of 148#45 of 148#33 of 148 (best)
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions90.9%90.8%92.8% (best)
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics64.6% (best)57.2%62.8%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics95.6%96.1% (best)95.6%
SWE-bench VerifiedFixing real GitHub issues77.3%76.7%79.3% (best)
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions55.8%34.9%66.2% (best)
Price per million tokens
Input$2.50$0.95 (best)$1.50
Output$7.50$4.00 (best)$9.00
Cached input$0.50$0.16$0.15 (best)
Blended (3:1)$3.75$1.71 (best)$3.38
Long-context rateSame rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceOfficial Alibaba APIOfficial Moonshot AI APIOfficial Google API
Limits
Context window1,000,000 tokens262,144 tokens1,048,576 tokens (best)
Max output65,536 tokens262,144 tokens (best)65,536 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesNoYesYes
PDFsNoNoYes
AudioNoNoYes
VideoNoYesYes
ReasoningYesYesYesminimal · low · medium · high
Tool callingYesYesYes
Structured outputNoYesYes
Availability
WeightsProprietaryOpenProprietary
API model IDqwen3.7-maxkimi-k2.6gemini-3.5-flash
API providers2646 (best)32
ReleasedMay 21, 2026Apr 21, 2026May 19, 2026
Knowledge cutoff—Jan 2025Jan 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.

  • Qwen3.7 Max$40.00
  • Kimi K2.6$17.50
  • Gemini 3.5 Flash$33.00
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Qwen3.7 Max, Kimi K2.6 or Gemini 3.5 Flash?

Gemini 3.5 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 69/100 against Kimi K2.6 (65) and Qwen3.7 Max (58). It leads on inputs & features. Kimi K2.6 wins on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, Qwen3.7 Max, Kimi K2.6 or Gemini 3.5 Flash?

Kimi K2.6 is cheaper at $0.95 input / $4.00 output per million tokens (official Moonshot AI API price). Gemini 3.5 Flash costs $1.50 input / $9.00 output per million tokens (official Google API price); Qwen3.7 Max costs $2.50 input / $7.50 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $1.71 per million tokens for Kimi K2.6 versus $3.38 for Gemini 3.5 Flash (2× as much) and $3.75 for Qwen3.7 Max (2.2× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

Gemini 3.5 Flash scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Gemini 3.5 Flash 154.5 (#33 of 148), Qwen3.7 Max 153.7 (#37 of 148) and Kimi K2.6 151.1 (#45 of 148). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (152.5–156.6 vs 151.9–156.0), so treat the gap as small. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — Gemini 3.5 Flash 92.8%, Qwen3.7 Max 90.9%, Kimi K2.6 90.8%; FrontierMath Tiers 1–3 — Qwen3.7 Max 64.6%, Gemini 3.5 Flash 62.8%, Kimi K2.6 57.2%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — Kimi K2.6 96.1%, Qwen3.7 Max 95.6%, Gemini 3.5 Flash 95.6%; SWE-bench Verified — Gemini 3.5 Flash 79.3%, Qwen3.7 Max 77.3%, Kimi K2.6 76.7%; SimpleQA Verified — Gemini 3.5 Flash 66.2%, Qwen3.7 Max 55.8%, Kimi K2.6 34.9%.

Which is better for coding?

Gemini 3.5 Flash resolves more real GitHub issues on SWE-bench Verified: Gemini 3.5 Flash 79.3%, Qwen3.7 Max 77.3% and Kimi K2.6 76.7%. All three support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Gemini 3.5 Flash has the largest context window at 1,048,576 tokens, against 1,000,000 for Qwen3.7 Max and 262,144 for Kimi K2.6. Maximum output per response: Qwen3.7 Max up to 65,536, Kimi K2.6 up to 262,144, Gemini 3.5 Flash up to 65,536 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Qwen3.7 Max accepts text; Kimi K2.6 accepts text, images and video; Gemini 3.5 Flash accepts text, images, PDFs, audio and video. Gemini 3.5 Flash handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Kimi K2.6 publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Qwen3.7 Max and Gemini 3.5 Flash is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Qwen3.7 Max is the newest, released May 21, 2026. Gemini 3.5 Flash came out May 19, 2026; Kimi K2.6 came out Apr 21, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: Kimi K2.6 Jan 2025, Gemini 3.5 Flash 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.