Kimi K3 vs Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct

    Comparison

    As of August 20, 2026, Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct is 99% cheaper per million tokens than Kimi K3. Kimi K3 is $3.00 / $15.00 per million input/output tokens versus Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct at $0.09 / $0.09. Sources: https://platform.kimi.com/docs/pricing/chat and https://bailian.console.aliyun.com/

    Sources: Moonshot AI pricing (https://platform.kimi.com/docs/pricing/chat); Qwen pricing (https://bailian.console.aliyun.com/)

    Kimi K3

    Moonshot AI

    $18.00blended / 1M

    Input

    $3.00

    Output

    $15.00

    1M ctx|Open Source
    99%
    cheaper
    Better value

    Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct

    Qwen

    $0.18blended / 1M

    Input

    $0.09

    Output

    $0.09

    128K ctx|Open Source
    Save $17.82 per million tokens by choosing Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct over Kimi K3.

    Kimi K3 vs Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct comparison

    Token pricing, specs, and benchmarks side by side

    Metric
    Kimi K3
    Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct
    Provider
    Provider
    Moonshot AI
    Qwen
    License
    Open Source
    Open Source
    Release Date
    2026-07-16
    2024-09-19
    Pricing (per 1M tokens)
    Input Price+3233%
    $3.00
    $0.09
    Output Price+16567%
    $15.00
    $0.09
    Blended (1M + 1M)
    $18.00
    $0.18
    Model Details
    Context Window
    1M
    128K
    Max Output Tokens
    1M
    128K
    Knowledge Cutoff
    N/A
    N/A
    Throughput
    8.253358168863906 tok/s
    42 tok/s
    Benchmarks
    56%
    93.5%
    93.5%
    67.5%
    68.5%
    87.2%
    31.4%
    58.7%
    1681.75
    91.2%
    42.7%
    60.4%
    84.8%
    76.5%
    84.2%
    81.6%
    91.3%
    68.9%
    75.1%
    88.2%
    83%
    92.7%
    57.2%
    51.6%
    37.6%
    70.5%
    85.7%
    84.8%
    71.6%
    23.4%
    79.0%
    73.5%
    Deck Bench Internal
    73.5%
    67.5%
    66.4%
    81.2%
    44.2%
    81.2%
    19%
    91.1%
    43.5%
    52.9%
    Kimi Code Bench 2 0 Internal
    72.9%
    46.2%
    97.8%
    90.2%
    48.9%
    88.0%
    88.0%
    50.4%
    77.5%
    63.3%
    91.1%
    Perceptionbench Internal
    58.5%
    54.3%
    75.7%
    43.1%
    54.2%
    80.8%
    51%
    41%
    Benchmark Wins
    Kimi K3 3|0 Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct

    Verdict

    Kimi K3 vs Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct: the bottom line

    Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct offers significantly lower pricing, while Kimi K3 leads on benchmark performance. Your choice depends on whether cost efficiency or raw capability matters more for your use case.

    Kimi K3 vs Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct FAQ

    Which is cheaper, Kimi K3 or Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct?

    As of August 20, 2026, Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct is 99% cheaper on blended LLM API pricing. Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct costs $0.09 per million input tokens and $0.09 per million output tokens ($0.18 blended 1M-in + 1M-out). Kimi K3 costs $3.00 / $15.00 per million tokens ($18.00 blended). Sources: https://platform.kimi.com/docs/pricing/chat and https://bailian.console.aliyun.com/. The cheapest LLM for your app still depends on how many output tokens you generate.

    How much does Kimi K3 vs Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct cost per million tokens?

    Kimi K3 Moonshot AI API pricing is $3.00 input and $15.00 output per million tokens via Moonshot AI. Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct Qwen API pricing is $0.09 input and $0.09 output per million tokens via Qwen. Use those four numbers, not ChatGPT Plus or Claude Pro subscription prices, when you are comparing APIs.

    Which is better for coding, Kimi K3 or Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct?

    Kimi K3 leads on SWE-bench Verified: Kimi K3 at 93.4% vs Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct at 9%. SWE-bench measures real GitHub fixes; LiveCodeBench measures contest programming.

    What is the context window for Kimi K3 vs Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct?

    Kimi K3 supports a 1M token context window, while Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct supports 128K tokens. Kimi K3 offers a larger context window. Filling a larger window bills more input tokens, so the cheaper-per-million model can still cost more on long documents.

    Which model performs better on benchmarks, Kimi K3 or Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct?

    Kimi K3 leads on 3 of 3 shared benchmarks versus Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct's 0 wins. Check the comparison table for GPQA Diamond, SWE-bench, MMLU, HLE, and the other evals we track. Token price and benchmark score together are the usual LLM comparison, not either number alone.

    Is Kimi K3 or Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct better for production use?

    Both Kimi K3 and Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct are production API models. For cost-sensitive production traffic, Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct has better economics on the blended 1M-in + 1M-out scale. For maximum capability, weight the benchmark table for your domain. Many production stacks route cheap models for drafts and a frontier model for the hard turn, which is usually cheaper than sending everything to the expensive API.

    Can I switch between Kimi K3 and Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct in my app?

    Yes. Call Kimi K3 through Moonshot AI and Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct through Qwen with separate API keys, or through a gateway that already wraps both. Keep prompts in tokens, not characters, when you estimate the invoice. AnotherWrapper templates can swap providers without rewriting auth and billing.

    How accurate is this Kimi K3 vs Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct pricing data?

    List rates are the latest published Moonshot AI API pricing and Qwen API pricing, quoted per million tokens. Official rate sheets: https://platform.kimi.com/docs/pricing/chat and https://bailian.console.aliyun.com/. Prompt caching, batch APIs, and committed-use discounts can change the invoice. Benchmark scores are from official publications and independent evals, updated as new numbers land.

    What is the output token limit for Kimi K3 and Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct?

    Kimi K3 supports up to 1M output tokens per request, while Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct supports up to 128K output tokens. Output tokens are usually the expensive half of API pricing, so a higher max output cap is a capability, not a discount.

    Which model has better throughput, Kimi K3 or Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct?

    Kimi K3 runs at approximately 8.253358168863906 tokens/second while Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct runs at 42 tokens/second. Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct is faster in raw throughput. Throughput (tokens per second) and time-to-first-token are why two models with the same per-million-token price can still feel different in chat and agents.

    How do I switch the models in this Kimi K3 vs Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct comparison?

    Use the model pickers at the top of this LLM comparison. Search any model in the index and the URL updates. Open Kimi K3 or Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct from the sidebar for the single-model API pricing page, or go back to the LLM pricing table to sort by cheapest blended cost.

    Kimi K3 vs Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct pricing

    This comparison covers API pricing, context window, throughput, and benchmark scores. Kimi K3 costs $3.00/M input and $15.00/M output. Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct costs $0.09/M input and $0.09/M output.

    Rank both on the LLM leaderboard, SWE-bench, and Humanity's Last Exam.

    The index

    All Large Language Models

    280 models across 33 providers. Search or jump to a lab — every model page stays linked here.

    Baidu

    1 models

    Inception

    1 models

    inclusionAI

    1 models

    LG AI Research

    1 models

    Nous Research

    1 models

    Sakana AI

    1 models

    StepFun

    1 models

    Tencent

    1 models

    Thinking Machines

    1 models

    Unisound

    1 models

    Upstage

    1 models

    Next step

    You found the model. Now ship the product.

    Auth, billing, and the API layer are already decided. Fork 8 finished AI apps, or have us build the first version with you.