新帳號 免費註冊,送 10 次呼叫,最高 $1,免綁卡。

Kimi K2.7 Code vs Qwen3.8 Max

vs

什麼情況選哪一個

kimi-k2.7-code 在價目表的每一行都更便宜,輸入 $0.95 對 $2(低約 2.1 倍)、輸出 $4 對 $6,而且它獨有地在文字和影像之外還接受視訊,儘管它的思考模式無法關閉。qwen3.8-max 每 token 更貴,但換來約 3.8 倍的脈絡(983616 token)、131072 token 的最大輸出(是 Kimi 的 32768 的 4 倍),以及明確的長脈絡和視覺標誌。常規大小輸入上的大批量編碼與推理,或視訊輸入工作選 kimi-k2.7-code;整個程式庫或超長生成必須裝進一次呼叫時選 qwen3.8-max。

Benchmark 成績

高於平均沒有模型更高Kimi K2.7 Code1 / 50 / 5Qwen3.8 Max31 / 408 / 40
Kimi K2.7 Code Qwen3.8 Max 其他有成績的模型 其他模型平均 ★ 沒有模型分數更高
MLS-Bench-Lite
35.1%
41%
AndroidBench
N/A
75.1%
Cybergym
N/A
78.5%
HealthBench
N/A
沒有模型分數更高 60.2%
JobBench
N/A
53.4%
PLawBench
N/A
沒有模型分數更高 73.2%
GPQA Diamond
N/A
92.6%
Agents' Last Exam
N/A
27%

供應商公布: Alibaba (Qwen) Anthropic ByteDance DeepSeek Google MiniMax Moonshot OpenAI Tencent Z.ai

定價

Kimi K2.7 Code Qwen3.8 Max Δ
輸入 / 1M tokens $0.95 $2 0.47×
輸出 / 1M tokens $4 $6 0.67×
快取讀取 / 1M tokens $0.19 $0.25 0.76×
快取寫入 - 1.25x -

費率取自網站建置時的即時目錄;各模型頁面都列有最新的價目。

兩者的相對位置:每 1M tokens 的輸入價格,涵蓋同一計費單位下全部 76 個聊天模型(對數尺度)

Kimi K2.7 Code · $0.95 Qwen3.8 Max · $2
$0.05 · Qwen3 VL Flash $30 · GPT-5.4 Pro

功能

Kimi K2.7 Code Qwen3.8 Max
工具使用 是 是
思考控制 一律開啟 是,但供應商未公布調整參數
結構化輸出 - 是
提示詞快取 隱式(自動) 隱式 + 顯式
快取存活時間 未公布 explicit: 5m, reset on hit
最小快取前綴 未公布 1024 個 token

規格

Kimi K2.7 Code Qwen3.8 Max
輸入模態 文字 圖像 影片 文字 圖像
輸出模態 文字 文字
發布日期 2026-06 2026-08-03
上下文視窗 256K 984K
最大輸出 33K 131K
思考參數
  • thinking.type
  • thinking.keep
-
可接受的值
type
  • accepts only enabled
keep
  • accepts only all
-
預設值 thinking on with Preserved Thinking on -

規格摘錄自各供應商的文件;供應商沒有公布的項目就直接略過,不自行推測。 完整來源: Kimi K2.7 Code · Qwen3.8 Max

同一段提示詞,兩個模型,經閘道實測

提示詞 Explain to a CFO, in exactly three sentences, why our LLM bill doubled after we enabled reasoning. 檢查 恰好 3 句

Kimi K2.7 Code 通過 · 3 sentences

Enabling reasoning mode causes the model to generate an internal chain-of-thought before producing each answer, and that hidden reasoning text is billed like any other output. Those extra reasoning tokens typically add up to much more than the final response itself, so every API call now costs significantly more than before. Because our overall usage volume did not change, the doubled bill reflects that each query consumes roughly twice as many billable tokens.

輸出 259 tok (+174 思考) 延遲 5.4 s

Qwen3.8 Max 通過 · 3 sentences

Enabling reasoning makes the model produce additional hidden steps before responding, and those tokens are billable. It also tends to lengthen each interaction because the model works through more possibilities before settling on an answer. Therefore, the bill doubled mainly due to higher compute and token usage per request, not necessarily because the number of requests doubled.

輸出 378 tok (+305 思考) 延遲 8.6 s

是否照指令做(剛好三句,數得出來)、語氣是否貼合對象(寫給 CFO 看),以及下方 token 計量顯示出的隱藏思考計費落差。

提示詞 This function is supposed to return the longest run of consecutive equal items, but callers report it is off by one on single-element inputs and misses runs that end at the last index. Fix it and explain the bug in one paragraph. 檢查 修正後通過測試

Kimi K2.7 Code 通過 · 8/8 cases

```python def longest_run(xs): if not xs: return 0 best = 1 cur = 1 for i in range(1, len(xs)): if xs[i] == xs[i - 1]: cur += 1 best = max(best, cur) else: cur = 1 return best ``` The bug is that the function counts *transitions* between equal neighbors instead of counting the items themselves, so a single-element list never enters the loop and returns `0` instead of `1`. Likewise, resetting `cur` to `0` on a mismatch forgets the current item that starts a new run, which causes runs that end at the last index to be undercounted. Initializing both `best` and `cur` to `1` and resetting `cur` to `1` fixes both issues.

輸出 410 tok (+222 思考) 延遲 9.4 s

Qwen3.8 Max 通過 · 8/8 cases

```python def longest_run(xs): if not xs: return 0 best = cur = 1 for i in range(1, len(xs)): if xs[i] == xs[i - 1]: cur += 1 else: cur = 1 best = max(best, cur) return best ``` The bug is that the original code starts `best` and `cur` at `0`, so it counts adjacent equal *transitions* rather than the number of items in the run. A run of length `n` has only `n - 1` equal-neighbor transitions, so single-element inputs return `0`, and runs that reach the end are undercounted by one. Initializing the current run to `1` for the first element, resetting it to `1` on a break, and updating `best` from that count fixes the off-by-one.

輸出 1616 tok (+1411 思考) 延遲 34.7 s

修正是否真的正確(跑得起來)、說明的資訊密度,以及在範圍明確的任務上的 token 效率。

提示詞 Extract a JSON object with fields {company, quarter, revenue_usd_m, growth_pct, guidance} from this text. Use null for anything not stated; add no other fields. 檢查 有效的 JSON,完全符合 schema

Kimi K2.7 Code 通過 · 5/5 fields, guidance "withheld pending the Q4 close"

```json { "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "September quarter", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": 11, "guidance": "withheld pending the Q4 close" } ```

輸出 721 tok (+663 思考) 延遲 13.2 s

Qwen3.8 Max 通過 · 5/5 fields, guidance null

{ "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "September quarter", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": 11, "guidance": null }

輸出 1199 tok (+1141 思考) 延遲 24.4 s

是否遵守 schema(不自創欄位)、面對幻覺誘因的表現(題目明確不給 guidance),以及結構化輸出路徑的差異。

提示詞 Write a 120-word product announcement for an API gateway feature that caches prompts across providers. Forbidden words: "seamless", "unlock", "game-changer", "revolutionize", "empower". Exactly one sentence must be a question. 檢查 120 詞,0 個禁用詞

Kimi K2.7 Code 通過 · 120 words, 0 banned, 1 question

We're introducing Prompt Cache for our API Gateway, a new capability that stores prompt responses across multiple AI providers. By caching replies, you reduce redundant calls, lower latency, and cut costs without changing how you build. Teams using several model providers can now reuse identical prompt results instantly, keeping traffic consistent and budgets predictable. Responses are keyed by provider, model, and exact prompt, so you always get the right result. Configure TTL, hit thresholds, and eviction rules from a single dashboard. It fits into your existing routing and requires no code changes. Setup takes minutes and works with your current endpoints. Want to see how much latency and spend you can trim? Check the docs to enable Prompt Cache today.

輸出 2375 tok (+2235 思考) 延遲 38.6 s

Qwen3.8 Max 通過 · 120 words, 0 banned, 1 question

Today, our API gateway adds prompt caching across major model providers. It stores prompts and responses in one fast cache layer. Teams can lower token spend, reduce latency, and repeat reliable answers. The feature supports OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, and Mistral through one configuration. You can set retention rules, scope access, and invalidate entries quickly. How does your team maintain consistent results during provider outages? Approved cached responses keep applications stable while fallback routes recover. The dashboard shows hit rates, savings, latency, and provider usage. Engineers receive audit trails for every cached prompt, enabling safer testing. Product managers can compare cost trends before and after cache adoption. Start with a small route, then safely expand caching to production traffic right now.

輸出 2744 tok (+2591 思考) 延遲 46.3 s

是否遵守限制(字數上限、禁用詞清單、只能有一句問句)、文字風格的特徵,以及長度控制。

改一行程式碼就能在兩者之間切換

下面每個頁籤都列了這兩個模型 ID,要改的只有醒目標示的那兩行。端點、金鑰和請求格式都不變。

from openai import OpenAI

client = OpenAI(
    base_url="https://synthorai.io/v1",
    api_key="sk-syn-...",
)

resp = client.chat.completions.create(
    model="kimi-k2.7-code",
    # model="qwen3.8-max",  # 取消這一行的註解,並把上一行註解掉
    messages=[{"role": "user", "content": "Summarize this diff"}],
    reasoning_effort="medium",
)
print(resp.choices[0].message.content)

取得 API 金鑰 →

常見問題

Kimi K2.7 Code 和 Qwen3.8 Max 哪個比較便宜?

以「輸入 / 1M tokens」來看,Kimi K2.7 Code 比較便宜($0.95 對 $2,相差 2.1×)。其他項目的結果可能相反,完整價目請看上表;實際成本要看你的用量組合。

可以只串接一次,就對 Kimi K2.7 Code 和 Qwen3.8 Max 做 A/B 測試嗎?

可以。兩個模型都走同一個 OpenAI 相容端點,用的也是同一把 API 金鑰,切換時只要改一行裡的模型名稱字串。你可以把一部分流量分別導到兩邊,再直接比較帳單。

Kimi K2.7 Code 與 Qwen3.8 Max 支援提示詞快取嗎?

支援。兩者的快取讀取費率都低於輸入費率,所以前綴已經進快取的工作負載,實際成本會比官網價算出來的低。確切的快取讀取價格請見上方定價表。

相關比較