Kimi K3.1 Pro vs Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
Which is better for the money: Kimi K3.1 Pro 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
Kimi K3.1 Pro scores 15.2 points higher (55.1 vs 39.9) but costs 1.2× as much to run the benchmark ($3117 vs $2632; both flagship class). Pick Kimi K3.1 Pro when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B.
| Metric | Kimi K3.1 Pro | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 55.1 | 39.9 | −27.6% Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is 27.6% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $3,117.31 | $2,632.05 | −15.6% Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is 15.6% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 55.12s | 64.84s | +17.6% Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is 17.6% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $2.00 / $10.0 | $2.00 / $6.00 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B vs Kimi K3.1 Pro: 27.6% less intelligence, 15.6% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 17.6% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Kimi K3.1 Pro is on today's frontier: nothing is both smarter and cheaper.
- 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 K3.1 ProQwen3.8 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-k3-1-pro/qwen3-8-2-4t-a95b · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/kimi-k3-1-pro/qwen3-8-2-4t-a95b?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill