Side-by-side comparison
Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking vs Kimi K2.5
Qwen
Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking
👁 Vision
🔧 Tools
{} JSON
Input / 1M
$0.2600
Output / 1M
$2.6000
MoonshotAI
Kimi K2.5
👁 Vision
🔧 Tools
{} JSON
Input / 1M
$0.4000
Output / 1M
$1.9000
| Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking | Kimi K2.5 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Qwen | MoonshotAI |
| Context window Maximum tokens (input + output) the model can process in a single request. Glossary → | 131,072 | 262,144 |
| Capabilities Optional capabilities the model advertises: vision (images), tools (function calling), json_mode (structured output). | vision, tools, json_mode | vision, tools, json_mode |
| Input $ / 1M tokens Cost for tokens you send (prompt + context). Cheaper side highlighted. Glossary → | 0.2600 | 0.4000 |
| Output $ / 1M tokens Cost for tokens the model generates. Output is normally 3–5× pricier than input. Glossary → | 2.6000 | 1.9000 |
Frequently asked questions
Which is cheaper, Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking or Kimi K2.5?
Kimi K2.5 is cheaper than Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking on a 50/50 input/output blend by about $0.28 per 1M tokens. Exact savings depend on your input-vs-output ratio — use the cost calculator on this page for a workload-specific estimate.
Which has a larger context window, Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking or Kimi K2.5?
Kimi K2.5 has the larger context window at 262k tokens versus 131k tokens for Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking. That means Kimi K2.5 can ingest about 2.0x as much text per request.
What is the difference between Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking and Kimi K2.5?
Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking comes from Qwen; Kimi K2.5 comes from MoonshotAI. They differ in pricing, context window, and supported capabilities — see the side-by-side table on this page for the exact figures, refreshed nightly.