Roboflow

Kimi K3 vs Qwen3.8 27B

Compare Kimi K3 and Qwen3.8 27B side-by-side.

Compare Kimi K3 vs Qwen3.8 27B live

Run the same image across every model that supports a task and compare their outputs side-by-side.

These models don't share enough common tasks for a side-by-side demo. See the comparison table below for their capabilities.

Models in this comparison

MoonshotAI

Kimi K3 vs Qwen3.8 27B on Vision Evals

Kimi K3 scores higher on 5 of the six Vision Evals tasks.

The widest gap is OCR, where Kimi K3 leads 93.0% to 81.4%.

Overall, Kimi K3 averages 66.5% (#20 of 30) against 61.2% (#29 of 30) for Qwen3.8 27B.

Qwen3.8 27B is both cheaper ($0.0018 vs $0.011 per sample) and faster (7.3s vs 12.7s per sample).

Kimi K3Qwen3.8 27B

Kimi K3 vs Qwen3.8 27B Comparison Table

Evals updated August 14, 2026Pricing updated August 15, 2026

PropertyKimi K3Qwen3.8 27B
OrganizationMoonshot AIQwen
Categoryopenopen
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateJul 2026Aug 2026
Context Window1.0M262K
Parameters2.8T27.78B
LicenseModified MITApache 2.0
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$3.00$0.450
Output $/1M$15.00$3.20
Vision Tasks
CaptioningDemo
Chart Question Answering
ClassificationDemo
Document Question Answering
Image Tagging
Multi-Label Classification
OCRDemo
Vision Language
Visual Question AnsweringDemo
Object DetectionDemo
Model Features
Foundation Vision
LLMs with Vision Capabilities
Multimodal Vision
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 6 vision tasks, pooled at low effort
Overall
66.5%
61.2%
Avg cost / sample$0.011$0.0018
Avg speed / sample12.71s7.33s
By task
Object Detection
51.9%
$0.020
54.5%
$0.0036
Counting
46.0%
$0.0046
41.9%
$0.0005
Identification
81.3%
$0.0041
78.1%
$0.0005
OCR
93.0%
$0.0094
81.4%
$0.0019
Data Extraction
84.5%
$0.0046
79.4%
$0.0005
Reasoning (low)
42.4%
$0.0044
31.8%
$0.0005
Reasoning (high)
74.2%
$0.037
62.3%
$0.0087

Kimi K3 vs Qwen3.8 27B: Overview

Kimi K3

Kimi K3 is a sparse Mixture-of-Experts large language model developed by Moonshot AI, with 2.8 trillion total parameters and a 1-million-token context window. The model activates 16 out of 896 experts per token using the Stable LatentMoE framework, and is built on two architectural innovations: Kimi Delta Attention (KDA), a hybrid linear attention mechanism that enables up to 6.3x faster decoding in long-context settings, and Attention Residuals (AttnRes), which selectively retrieves representations across model depth and delivers roughly 25% higher training efficiency. Together with refined training and data recipes, these structural advances yield approximately 2.5x better overall scaling efficiency compared to its predecessor Kimi K2. The model applies quantization-aware training from the supervised fine-tuning stage onward, using MXFP4 weights with MXFP8 activations for hardware compatibility. Thinking mode is always enabled at launch, with reasoning effort configurable via the reasoning_effort field.

Kimi K3 supports native visual understanding alongside text, accepting image inputs for tasks that combine software engineering and visual reasoning. It targets long-horizon coding, knowledge work, and agentic workflows, and ships in two variants: K3 Max for general chat and agent tasks, and K3 Swarm Max for large-scale parallel processing across many coordinated sub-agents. The model is compatible with the OpenAI SDK via an OpenAI-compatible API. Full model weights are scheduled for release by July 27, 2026 under a Modified MIT license, following the open-weight pattern established by the Kimi K2 model family. A technical report with full architecture, training, and evaluation details is expected to accompany the weights release.

Qwen3.8 27B

Qwen3.8-27B is a dense vision-language model of roughly 27.78 billion parameters from Alibaba's Qwen team, built on the architectural foundation established by the Qwen3.5 generation. It takes interleaved text, image, and video input through an integrated vision encoder and produces text, covering document and chart understanding, visual question answering, front-end code generation from visual references, and agentic computer-use workflows. The decoder is a hybrid stack of 64 layers that repeats a pattern of three Gated DeltaNet linear-attention blocks, each followed by a feed-forward block, then one grouped-query full-attention block, so only a quarter of the layers maintain a conventional key-value cache. Native context length is 262,144 tokens.

Post-training targets long-horizon agentic work, and the model exposes per-request thinking control that lets callers switch reasoning traces on or off and choose a reasoning effort level. Multi-token prediction weights are trained alongside the main network for speculative decoding. Qwen reports improvements over Qwen3.6-27B on agentic and multimodal evaluations including Terminal-Bench 2.1, OSWorld-Verified, and SWE-bench Multimodal, with additional results on MathVision, CharXiv, and an internal Vision2Web suite.

Frequently Asked Questions

On Roboflow's Vision Evals, Kimi K3 performed better. It scores higher on 5 of the six vision tasks and averages 66.5% (#20 of 30) against 61.2% (#29 of 30) for Qwen3.8 27B. These scores measure vision capabilities only; either model may perform differently on work outside this benchmark's tasks.

Yes. On the Vision Evals OCR benchmark, Kimi K3 leads with 93.0% against 81.4%. This is the widest gap between the two models across the benchmark's tasks.

Qwen3.8 27B is cheaper to run. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals task mix it averaged $0.0018 per sample against $0.011. Kimi K3 is priced at $3.00 per 1M input tokens and $15.00 per 1M output; Qwen3.8 27B is priced at $0.45 per 1M input tokens and $3.20 per 1M output. Actual costs depend on your image sizes, prompts, and output length.

Qwen3.8 27B is faster. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals it averaged 7.3s per inference against 12.7s. Latency varies with image size, prompt length, and provider load, so treat these as relative rather than guaranteed figures.