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.

Open OCR in the full playground
MoonshotAIKimi K2.5
Run to compare this model.
QwenQwen3.5 27B
Run to compare this model.

Models in this comparison

MoonshotAI

Kimi K2.5 vs Qwen3.5 27B: Overview

Kimi K2.5

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

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

PropertyKimi K2.5Qwen3.5 27B
OrganizationMoonshot AIQwen
Categoryopenopen
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateJan 2026Feb 2026
Context Window256K262K
Parameters1T27B
LicenseModified MITApache 2.0
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$0.375$0.195
Output $/1M$2.02$1.56
Vision Tasks
CaptioningDemoDemo
OCRDemoDemo
Vision Language
Visual Question AnsweringDemoDemo
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 Time14.81s1.98s
Median input tokensincl. image tokens1.6K1.2K
Median output tokens7667
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