Kimi K2.7 Code vs Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
Which is better for the money: Kimi K2.7 Code 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 2026-10-25.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B scores 14.1 points higher (39.9 vs 25.8) but costs 2.7× as much to run the benchmark ($2632 vs $993; flagship vs premium cost classes). Pick Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Kimi K2.7 Code.
| Metric | Kimi K2.7 Code | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 25.8 | 39.9 | +54.7% Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is 54.7% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $992.88 | $2,632.05 | +165.1% Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is 2.7× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 46.45s | 61.58s | +32.6% Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is 32.6% 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 K2.7 Code: 54.7% more intelligence, 165.1% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 32.6% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Kimi K2.7 Code is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Xhigh) scores 51.00 for $662.
- 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 K2.7 CodeQwen3.8 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-k2-7-code/qwen3-8-2-4t-a95b · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/kimi-k2-7-code/qwen3-8-2-4t-a95b?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill