Kimi K2.5 vs Qwen3.5 27B
Compare Kimi K2.5 and Qwen3.5 27B side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Image Captioning, OCR, and Open Prompt.
Compare Kimi K2.5 vs Qwen3.5 27B live
Run the same image across every model that supports a task and compare their outputs side-by-side.
Extract and compare text from images across multiple models.
Upload an image
Drag and drop an image here, or click to browse
Models in this comparison
Kimi K2.5 vs Qwen3.5 27B: Overview
Kimi K2.5 is a frontier-scale multimodal AI model developed by Moonshot AI and released on January 27, 2026. As a significant advancement within the Kimi K2 family, it utilizes a sparse Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) architecture with 1 trillion total parameters (32 billion active per inference) and a massive 256K-token context window. The model features native multimodal integration via a 400M-parameter MoonViT encoder, allowing it to process text, images, and video frames simultaneously. Built for both speed and depth, it offers "Instant" and "Thinking" modes, the latter of which excels at expert-level reasoning, scoring 50.2% on the Humanity’s Last Exam (HLE) benchmark when equipped with tools.
The model is released under a Modified MIT License, which remains open-weight but requires attribution for high-revenue commercial entities. It introduces an "Agent Swarm" paradigm capable of coordinating up to 100 specialized sub-agents for parallel workflows, significantly reducing latency in complex research tasks. For vision tasks, Kimi K2.5 demonstrates strong autonomous visual debugging capabilities, where it can inspect its own generated UI outputs against visual specifications to iteratively refine frontend code. This makes it a powerful choice for developers testing automated UI reconstruction, high-fidelity OCR document processing, and multi-step agentic research grounded in complex visual data.
Qwen3.5-27B is a multimodal dense hybrid model developed by Alibaba Cloud’s Qwen team and released in February 2026 as a high-precision entry in the Qwen3.5 "Medium" series. Unlike its Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) siblings, the 27B model utilizes a dense architecture combining Gated Delta Networks with a feed-forward structure, activating its full parameter suite for every inference to maximize reliability. This design provides the highest instruction-following and coding accuracy in its class, with a notable IFEval score of 95.0. The model features a native 262K-token context window, extensible to 1M tokens via YaRN (RoPE scaling), and is released under the Apache-2.0 license.
Optimized for agentic workflows, Qwen3.5-27B employs an early-fusion architecture that treats visual and textual data as a unified stream for deep cross-modal reasoning. This unified approach allows the model to excel in technical analysis and software engineering, matching GPT-5-mini with a 72.4% score on SWE-bench Verified. While the larger MoE variants in the family lead in raw knowledge benchmarks, the 27B model offers a stable and high-density alternative for structured data extraction and spatial perception, contributing to the Qwen3.5 family’s generational leap in OCR accuracy over the previous Qwen3-VL series.
Kimi K2.5 vs Qwen3.5 27B Comparison Table
| Property | Kimi K2.5 | Qwen3.5 27B |
|---|---|---|
| Organization | Moonshot AI | Qwen |
| Category | open | open |
| Modality | multimodal | multimodal |
| Release Date | Jan 2026 | Feb 2026 |
| Context Window | 256K | 262K |
| Parameters | 1T | 27B |
| License | Modified MIT | Apache 2.0 |
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input $/1M | $0.375 | $0.195 |
| Output $/1M | $2.02 | $1.56 |
| Vision Tasks | ||
| Captioning | Demo | Demo |
| OCR | Demo | Demo |
| Vision Language | ||
| Visual Question Answering | Demo | Demo |
| Object Detection | ||
| Model Features | ||
| Multimodal Vision | ||
| LLMs with Vision Capabilities | ||
Vision Evalspass/fail results · 67 prompts Score key:≥75%40–74%<40% | ||
| Overall Score | 35.82% | 71.64% |
| Avg Response Time | 14.81s | 1.98s |
| Median input tokensincl. image tokens | 1.6K | 1.2K |
| Median output tokens | 766 | 7 |
| Est. cost / taskon this benchmark | $0.0021 | $0.0002 |
| Defect Detection | 46.7%(7/15) | 80%(12/15) |
| Document Understanding | 55.6%(5/9) | 77.8%(7/9) |
| Object Counting | 10%(1/10) | 40%(4/10) |
| Object Understanding | 42.9%(6/14) | 78.6%(11/14) |
| Spatial Understanding | 26.3%(5/19) | 73.7%(14/19) |
Output tokens (incl. reasoning) and est. cost / task are measured on this benchmark from a single low-temperature run, and shown only for models whose run covered at least 90% of prompts. Methodology