Kimi K2.6 (Reasoning) vs Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
Which is better for the money: Kimi K2.6 (Reasoning) by Kimi or Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B by Alibaba? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-26.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B scores 12.9 points higher (39.9 vs 27.0) but costs 1.7× as much to run the benchmark ($2632 vs $1528; flagship vs premium cost classes). Pick Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Kimi K2.6 (Reasoning).
| Metric | Kimi K2.6 (Reasoning) | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 27.0 | 39.9 | +47.8% Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is 47.8% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $1,528.20 | $2,632.05 | +72.2% Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is 72.2% more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 54.26s | 61.67s | +13.7% Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is 13.7% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.95 / $4.00 | $2.00 / $6.00 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image, Video | Text |
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B vs Kimi K2.6 (Reasoning): 47.8% more intelligence, 72.2% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 13.7% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Kimi K2.6 (Reasoning) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Max) scores 51.80 for $1082.
- Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (High, Default Fallback) scores 53.60 for $2172.
Kimi K2.6 (Reasoning)Qwen3.8 2.4T A95BToday's Pareto frontierOpen-weights frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/kimi-k2-6/qwen3-8-2-4t-a95b · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/kimi-k2-6/qwen3-8-2-4t-a95b?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill