Pairwise benchmark snapshot · Aug 16, 2026

Kimi Chat 1.5 vs Qwen3.8 27B benchmark

Name: Kimi Chat 1.5 vs Qwen3.8 27B AI benchmark comparison
Creator: CompareLLM
License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

This page compares Kimi Chat 1.5 (Moonshot) and Qwen3.8 27B (Alibaba) using the latest snapshots we have as of Aug 16, 2026. On preference Elo, Kimi Chat 1.5 is ahead by 22 points (1,420 vs 1,398; seed-bootstrap (Aug 1, 2026)). On SWE-bench coding, Qwen3.8 27B resolves 58.8% versus 51% (seed-bootstrap (Aug 16, 2026)). Qwen3.8 27B streams faster (152 tok/s) while Kimi Chat 1.5 is the cheaper output token ($0.8/1M). Kimi Chat 1.5 has the larger context window (2M tokens). Every cell below is a dated snapshot from a named public source — we do not invent missing scores, and we do not run SWE-bench ourselves.

Share Analysis:

WhatsApp Telegram X / Post LinkedIn Reddit

Moonshot

Kimi Chat 1.5

Moonshot ultra-long context model supporting up to 2 million tokens per request.

Elo 1,420$0.8/1M out

Alibaba

Qwen3.8 27B

Alibaba open-weight 27B drop dated Aug 14 2026. Dense enough to self-host; not a frontier MoE.

Elo 1,398$3.1999999999999997/1M out

Swap or Add Any Model to this Matchup

Instant pairwise benchmark recalculation across 400+ LLMs

Model A

Model B

Quick vs:vs Claude Opus 4.5 vs Claude Opus 4.6 vs Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs Claude 3.7 Sonnet

Interactive Comparison Diagram

Matchup Breakdown

Tug-of-War Matchup Matrix

Category wins across intelligence, speed, and pricing efficiency.

Kimi Chat 1.5 (4)vsQwen3.8 27B (6)

Kimi Chat 1.5: 4W (40%)Overall: Qwen3.8 27BQwen3.8 27B: 6W (60%)

← Kimi Chat 1.5Qwen3.8 27B →

Qwen3.8 27B (4/5)

Intelligence & Reasoning

Preference Elo, Coding proficiency, SWE-bench & LiveBench accuracy

Preference Elo

1,420vs1,398

Coding Elo

1,390vs1,422

SWE-bench

51%vs58.8%

LiveBench

58%vs60.6%

GPQA Diamond

71.5%vs73.4%

Kimi Chat 1.5: 1WQwen3.8 27B: 4W

Qwen3.8 27B (2/2)

Speed & Latency

Generation throughput and time to first token responsiveness

Output speed

95 tok/svs152 tok/s

Time to first token

210 msvs140 ms

Kimi Chat 1.5: 0WQwen3.8 27B: 2W

Kimi Chat 1.5 (3/3)

Pricing & Capacity

Cost per million tokens and max context window length

Output price

$0.8/1Mvs$3.2/1M

Input price

$0.2/1Mvs$0.45/1M

Context window

2Mvs262k

Kimi Chat 1.5: 3WQwen3.8 27B: 0W

Capability Matchup Radar

Multi-Dimensional Capability Radar

Each spoke is a skill. Farther from the center is better (0–100th percentile). Tap any dot to inspect details.

Tap any node to inspect

Percentile 0–100

Dimensional AdvantageQwen3.8 27B 4/6

Preference Elo

Kimi Chat 1.5

22 pts advantage

Throughput Speed

Qwen3.8 27B

57 tok/s faster

Price Efficiency

Kimi Chat 1.5

$2.40/1M cheaper

Full Benchmark Score Matrix

—

Elo

High is better

+2%1,420

EloHigh is better

1,398

Code Elo

High is better

1,390

Code EloHigh is better

1,422+2%

LiveBench

High is better

58%

LiveBenchHigh is better

60.6%+4%

SWE-bench

High is better

51%

SWE-benchHigh is better

58.8%+15%

GPQA

High is better

71.5%

GPQAHigh is better

73.4%+3%

TTFT

Low is better

210 ms

TTFTLow is better

140 ms+50%

Speed

High is better

95 tok/s

SpeedHigh is better

152 tok/s+60%

In $

Low is better

+125%$0.2/1M

In $Low is better

$0.45/1M

Out $

Low is better

+300%$0.8/1M

Out $Low is better

$3.2/1M

Context

High is better

+663%2M

ContextHigh is better

262k

Interactive Simulator

Workload Cost & Savings Calculator

Simulate monthly production API costs based on published $/1M tokens.

Save up to 70% with Kimi Chat 1.5

Monthly Volume50M tokens/mo

Quick Presets:

Token Ratio (In vs Out)70% In / 30% Out

RAG / Search (10% out)Coding / Chat (50% out)

Kimi Chat 1.5$19.00 / mo

In: $7.00Out: $12.00

Qwen3.8 27B$63.75 / mo

In: $15.75Out: $48.00

Estimated Cost Delta

Kimi Chat 1.5 is estimated to save $44.75/month ($537/year).

Based on 50M tokens (30% gen)

Key Selection Recommendations

1
Qwen3.8 27B:Pick Qwen3.8 27B when repo-level coding accuracy is the constraint.
2
Kimi Chat 1.5:Pick Kimi Chat 1.5 when you are optimizing output cost.
3
Qwen3.8 27B:Pick Qwen3.8 27B when time-to-first-token matters more than peak Elo.

Recommended Workload Routing

Repo / coding agentsQwen3.8 27B

Higher SWE-bench (58.8%).

High-volume chatKimi Chat 1.5

Lower output list price ($0.8/1M).

Voice / low-latency UIQwen3.8 27B

Lower TTFT (140 ms).

Long-document RAGKimi Chat 1.5

Larger window (2M).

Screenshots / visionKimi Chat 1.5

Kimi Chat 1.5 is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Target Workload	Recommended Pick	Evaluation Rationale
Repo / coding agents	Qwen3.8 27B	Higher SWE-bench (58.8%).
High-volume chat	Kimi Chat 1.5	Lower output list price ($0.8/1M).
Voice / low-latency UI	Qwen3.8 27B	Lower TTFT (140 ms).
Long-document RAG	Kimi Chat 1.5	Larger window (2M).
Screenshots / vision	Kimi Chat 1.5	Kimi Chat 1.5 is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Related Editorial Dispatches & Benchmark Notes

View all news

launchAug 14, 2026

Qwen3.8 27B (Aug 14): dense enough to self-host, not a frontier MoE

Alibaba open-weight 27B drop. Local/open-weight lists should see it. It will not win frontier-agents.

Community Sentiment

Cast Your Matchup Vote

0 total votes

Community Discussions (0)

No comments posted on this matchup yet. Be the first to share an evaluation note!

Share card

The real PNG is generated at /compare/kimi-1-5-long-vs-qwen-3-8-27b/opengraph-image for crawlers.

PNG

CompareLLM Matrix

Verified head-to-head card

LIVE

Moonshot

Kimi Chat 1.5

Elo 1,420

LiveBench58%

SWE-bench51%

Speed95 tok/s

Output cost$0.8/1M

Alibaba

Qwen3.8 27B

Elo 1,398

LiveBench60.6%

SWE-bench58.8%

Speed152 tok/s

Output cost$3.2/1M

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is better overall, Kimi Chat 1.5 or Qwen3.8 27B?: Kimi Chat 1.5 has the higher preference Elo in our latest snapshot (1,420). “Better” still depends on coding, price, and latency — see the table.
Which is better at coding, Kimi Chat 1.5 or Qwen3.8 27B?: Qwen3.8 27B leads SWE-bench at 58.8% vs 51%. SWE-bench is one harness, not your repo.
Which is cheaper to run in production?: Kimi Chat 1.5 output tokens are $0.8/1M versus $3.2/1M. Input prices and retry rates still move the real bill.
Which is faster, Kimi Chat 1.5 or Qwen3.8 27B?: Qwen3.8 27B has the lower time-to-first-token (140 ms vs 210 ms). Tokens/sec is a separate column if you care about long completions.
Which has the larger context window?: Kimi Chat 1.5 accepts 2M tokens versus 262k.
Can I self-host either model?: Qwen3.8 27B is marked open-weights in our catalog. The other side is a closed API. Check the provider license before you ship weights.
Are these scores from CompareLLM’s own evals?: No. V1 aggregates public leaderboards (and optional first-party latency pings). Each cell names its source and date. Read /methodology.
What does preference Elo mean on this page?: Preference Elo is a crowd vote from LMArena / Arena. People see two hidden answers and pick the one they like more. The model that wins more often gets a higher Elo. That means people preferred it — not that it passed a school test. It is not SWE-bench, not accuracy, and not a number we invent. Kimi Chat 1.5 and Qwen3.8 27B Elo cells are dated snapshots from the named source — we do not compute Arena ourselves.

Similar Head-to-Head Comparisons

All Kimi Chat 1.5 matchups →|All Qwen3.8 27B matchups →

Kimi Chat 1.5 vs MoonshotAI: Kimi K2 0711 (next kimi)Qwen3.8 27B vs Qwen 3 Max (previous qwen)Qwen QwQ 32B vs Kimi Chat 1.5 Qwen 3 Max vs Kimi Chat 1.5 Kimi K3 vs Kimi Chat 1.5 Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B vs Kimi Chat 1.5

Kimi Chat 1.5 vs Qwen3.8 27B benchmark

Interactive Comparison Diagram

Matchup Breakdown

Tug-of-War Matchup Matrix

Category wins across intelligence, speed, and pricing efficiency.

Kimi Chat 1.5 (4)vsQwen3.8 27B (6)

Kimi Chat 1.5: 4W (40%)Overall: Qwen3.8 27BQwen3.8 27B: 6W (60%)

← Kimi Chat 1.5Qwen3.8 27B →

Qwen3.8 27B (4/5)

Intelligence & Reasoning

Preference Elo, Coding proficiency, SWE-bench & LiveBench accuracy

Preference Elo

1,420vs1,398

Coding Elo

1,390vs1,422

SWE-bench

51%vs58.8%

LiveBench

58%vs60.6%

GPQA Diamond

71.5%vs73.4%

Kimi Chat 1.5: 1WQwen3.8 27B: 4W

Qwen3.8 27B (2/2)

Speed & Latency

Generation throughput and time to first token responsiveness

Output speed

95 tok/svs152 tok/s

Time to first token

210 msvs140 ms

Kimi Chat 1.5: 0WQwen3.8 27B: 2W

Kimi Chat 1.5 (3/3)

Pricing & Capacity

Cost per million tokens and max context window length

Output price

$0.8/1Mvs$3.2/1M

Input price

$0.2/1Mvs$0.45/1M

Context window

2Mvs262k

Kimi Chat 1.5: 3WQwen3.8 27B: 0W

Recommended Workload Routing

Repo / coding agentsQwen3.8 27B

Higher SWE-bench (58.8%).

High-volume chatKimi Chat 1.5

Lower output list price ($0.8/1M).

Voice / low-latency UIQwen3.8 27B

Lower TTFT (140 ms).

Long-document RAGKimi Chat 1.5

Larger window (2M).

Screenshots / visionKimi Chat 1.5

Kimi Chat 1.5 is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Target Workload	Recommended Pick	Evaluation Rationale
Repo / coding agents	Qwen3.8 27B	Higher SWE-bench (58.8%).
High-volume chat	Kimi Chat 1.5	Lower output list price ($0.8/1M).
Voice / low-latency UI	Qwen3.8 27B	Lower TTFT (140 ms).
Long-document RAG	Kimi Chat 1.5	Larger window (2M).
Screenshots / vision	Kimi Chat 1.5	Kimi Chat 1.5 is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is better overall, Kimi Chat 1.5 or Qwen3.8 27B?

Kimi Chat 1.5 has the higher preference Elo in our latest snapshot (1,420). “Better” still depends on coding, price, and latency — see the table.

Which is better at coding, Kimi Chat 1.5 or Qwen3.8 27B?

Qwen3.8 27B leads SWE-bench at 58.8% vs 51%. SWE-bench is one harness, not your repo.

Which is cheaper to run in production?

Kimi Chat 1.5 output tokens are $0.8/1M versus $3.2/1M. Input prices and retry rates still move the real bill.

Which is faster, Kimi Chat 1.5 or Qwen3.8 27B?

Qwen3.8 27B has the lower time-to-first-token (140 ms vs 210 ms). Tokens/sec is a separate column if you care about long completions.

Which has the larger context window?

Kimi Chat 1.5 accepts 2M tokens versus 262k.

Can I self-host either model?

Qwen3.8 27B is marked open-weights in our catalog. The other side is a closed API. Check the provider license before you ship weights.

Are these scores from CompareLLM’s own evals?

No. V1 aggregates public leaderboards (and optional first-party latency pings). Each cell names its source and date. Read /methodology.

What does preference Elo mean on this page?

Preference Elo is a crowd vote from LMArena / Arena. People see two hidden answers and pick the one they like more. The model that wins more often gets a higher Elo. That means people preferred it — not that it passed a school test. It is not SWE-bench, not accuracy, and not a number we invent. Kimi Chat 1.5 and Qwen3.8 27B Elo cells are dated snapshots from the named source — we do not compute Arena ourselves.

Swap or Add Any Model to this Matchup

Interactive Comparison Diagram

Tug-of-War Matchup Matrix

Intelligence & Reasoning

Speed & Latency

Pricing & Capacity

Multi-Dimensional Capability Radar

Kimi Chat 1.5

Qwen3.8 27B

Kimi Chat 1.5

Full Benchmark Score Matrix

Workload Cost & Savings Calculator

Key Selection Recommendations

Recommended Workload Routing

Related Editorial Dispatches & Benchmark Notes

Qwen3.8 27B (Aug 14): dense enough to self-host, not a frontier MoE

Cast Your Matchup Vote

Community Discussions (0)

Share card

CompareLLM Matrix

Kimi Chat 1.5

Qwen3.8 27B

Frequently Asked Questions

Related news

Similar Head-to-Head Comparisons

Swap or Add Any Model to this Matchup

Interactive Comparison Diagram

Tug-of-War Matchup Matrix

Intelligence & Reasoning

Speed & Latency

Pricing & Capacity

Multi-Dimensional Capability Radar

Kimi Chat 1.5

Qwen3.8 27B

Kimi Chat 1.5

Full Benchmark Score Matrix

Workload Cost & Savings Calculator

Key Selection Recommendations

Recommended Workload Routing

Related Editorial Dispatches & Benchmark Notes

Qwen3.8 27B (Aug 14): dense enough to self-host, not a frontier MoE

Cast Your Matchup Vote

Community Discussions (0)

Share card

CompareLLM Matrix

Kimi Chat 1.5

Qwen3.8 27B

Frequently Asked Questions

Related news

Similar Head-to-Head Comparisons