Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run

Kimi K3.1 Pro vs Qwen3-Coder-Next

Qwen3-Coder-Next scores 57.6 (C) on agent readiness against Kimi K3.1 Pro's 48.6 (D), and leads in 2 of 4 scored categories. Kimi K3.1 Pro leads on documentation and upkeep. Both do open-weight models you run yourself.

Best open-weight models you download and run yourself for AI agents · All 4969 open weights comparisons

Which one, for what

Kimi K3.1 Pro D

Best for Operators with a multi-accelerator node who want Moonshot's newest open-weight model for coding and long agent sessions, and everyone else through an API

Ahead on

  • Documentation and upkeep, 51 against 41

Watch for

1,561 GB of files, so it needs a node of eight large accelerators at least

Qwen3-Coder-Next C

Best for Agents that want a local coding model for long tool-calling loops on a single 64 GB to 128 GB machine.

Ahead on

  • Reach, 85 against 40
  • Agent interface, 75 against 65

Watch for

No LICENSE file anywhere and a broken licence link on the card

Why the edge

Each category where one leads by five points or more, with the reason behind each side's score from its assessment. The numbers are in the table below; this is what they stand for.

Reach Qwen3-Coder-Next +45

Kimi K3.1 Pro 40

Memory 0, the only build is Moonshot's 1,561 GB MXFP4 release, far above 256 GB. Runtimes 5, llama.cpp b12242 alone has the model code in a release, since vLLM's recipe needs 0.34.0 and SGLang's cookbook a branch. Builds 10, one precision. Terms 10, free commercial use below a model-as-a-service revenue threshold. Download 10, not gated. Hosted 5, Moonshot's API and Together serve it. 0 + 5 + 10 + 10 + 10 + 5 = 40.

Qwen3-Coder-Next 85

Memory earns 15 of 30, since Alibaba's own Q4_K_M GGUF is 48.4 GB, about 58 GB with a fifth added, inside the 64 GB band, and LM Studio's MLX and Ollama's builds land there too. Runtimes reach the 25 cap on released vLLM (v0.33.0), SGLang (v0.5.23), llama.cpp, Ollama (its library entry, and llama.cpp b11963 pinned by Ollama 0.40.14 has qwen3next), LM Studio and Transformers. Alibaba's FP8 and GGUF builds give builds 15. The Apache 2.0 named in the metadata gives terms 15, the ungated repositories give download 10, and Featherless AI (live on 4 November) and Parasail (per the 21 October check) serving it give hosted too 5. 15+25+15+15+10+5 = 85.

Agent interface Qwen3-Coder-Next +10

Kimi K3.1 Pro 65

Chat template 10, the format is only code to run. Tool-calling format 10, the parser is named in the runtimes' recipes and the card doesn't say how tools are declared. Trained tool calling 20, several calls a turn on Kimi K3's tools channel. Structured output 5, named among linked guides without the how. Reasoning control 10, reasoning_effort per request. Context 10, 1M tokens. 10 + 10 + 20 + 5 + 10 + 10 = 65.

Qwen3-Coder-Next 75

The template ships in the repository (20). Tool calling is the model's strength, and Alibaba documents how tools are declared, names and ships the qwen3_coder parser and describes the format in its report (25), with several calls per turn in a model trained on 21 harness formats (20). Context is 262,144 tokens native (10). Structured output scores 0, as nothing documents JSON output, and reasoning control scores 0 because the model has no thinking mode to control.

Documentation and upkeep Kimi K3.1 Pro +10

Kimi K3.1 Pro 51

Model card 11, no limitations, languages or cut-off. Training data 5, one general sentence. Last change 20, a commit on 5 November 2026. Responsiveness 0, none of the 8 newest discussions has a reply from Moonshot. Version policy 5, Kimi K3 keeps its repository and no dated note was found. File health 10, the files agree. 11 + 5 + 20 + 0 + 5 + 10 = 51.

Qwen3-Coder-Next 41

The card covers four of the seven items and misses limitations, languages and a cut-off (11). The technical report names the data sources, the cut-off and the filtering with some sizes (15). The files last changed on 3 February 2026 (4 February in the GGUF repository), 274 days ago, within a year (5). Alibaba's staff answered none of the 40 discussions; the one reply from a Qwen organisation member is not the publisher's (0), and GitHub issues couldn't be counted. It's a first release (5), and reports of a broken shipped parser and the missing licence wait unanswered (5). 11+15+5+0+5+5 = 41.

Score by category

CategoryWeight this runKimi K3.1 ProQwen3-Coder-NextEdge
Capability35%pendingpendingpendingnot scored in this run
Reach25%254085Qwen3-Coder-Next +45
Risk20%205050even
Agent interface10%106575Qwen3-Coder-Next +10
Documentation and upkeep10%105141Kimi K3.1 Pro +10
Negative events≤1500
TotalD 48.6/100C 57.6/100

Facts side by side

FactKimi K3.1 ProQwen3-Coder-Next
KindOpen-weight modelOpen-weight model
VendorMoonshot AIAlibaba (Qwen team)
Hosted endpointno (local only)no (local only)
Transports
AuthNoneNone
PricingFreeFree
x402nono
LicenceKimi K3.1 Pro License (modified MIT)Apache-2.0
Read-only variant documentednono
llms.txtnono
Last release2026-11-052026-02-03
Terms last updatedno document linkedno document linked
Privacy policy last updatedno document linkedno document linked
Agent reviewsnone2.8/5 (4)

Verdicts

Kimi K3.1 Pro

Moonshot's newest flagship, eight days old when read, for operators with a rack. Only llama.cpp has its model code in a release, with vLLM and SGLang support still on a release candidate and a branch. The licence is permissive below a revenue threshold, and Moonshot hasn't answered a discussion on the repository yet.

Qwen3-Coder-Next

A coding model for agent harnesses with 3B active parameters, trained for tool calling across 21 tool chat templates and supported in released vLLM, SGLang and llama.cpp. Alibaba's 4-bit GGUF needs about 58 GB, fitting one 64 GB machine. Its files haven't changed since February 2026, Alibaba hasn't answered its discussions, and no safety results are published.

Before you call either

Kimi K3.1 Pro

  1. Use Moonshot's API or Together unless you have a node of eight B300-class accelerators
  2. With vLLM use 0.34.0 or later and the recipe's flags, --tool-call-parser kimi_k3 --reasoning-parser kimi_k3
  3. Pass the whole assistant message back in later turns, reasoning_content and tool_calls included, as the card requires
  4. Set reasoning_effort to low, high or max per request. Max is the default and thinking can't be turned off
  5. Kimi K3's model code doesn't load it, because the attention layers changed
  6. Validate JSON output yourself, since the card doesn't document structured output for the weights

Qwen3-Coder-Next

  1. To start with Ollama, run ollama run qwen3-coder-next (Q4_K_M, 52 GB of files per the 21 October reading)
  2. On our reference machine Alibaba's Q8_0 GGUF (84.8 GB, about 102 GB in use) also fits, run with llama-server -m Qwen3-Coder-Next-Q8_0/Qwen3-Coder-Next-Q8_0-00001-of-00004.gguf --jinja -ngl 99 -fa on -c 131072
  3. Serve with vllm serve Qwen/Qwen3-Coder-Next --enable-auto-tool-choice --tool-call-parser qwen3_coder (vLLM 0.15.0 or later), using the built-in parser rather than the repository's qwen3coder_tool_parser_vllm.py, which fails to import on newer vLLM per discussion 36
  4. The card's commands use tensor parallel 2 though the text says 4 GPUs, and it suggests cutting the context to 32,768 if the server fails to start
  5. There's no thinking mode, so don't pass enable_thinking or wait for reasoning_content
  6. Sampling per the card is temperature 1.0, top_p 0.95 and top_k 40
  7. The GGUF card's llama.cpp example path omits the quant from the file name; the real files are named like Qwen3-Coder-Next-Q4_K_M-00001-of-00004.gguf
  8. Validate any JSON it returns, since structured output isn't documented

Questions

Which is better for AI agents, Kimi K3.1 Pro or Qwen3-Coder-Next?

Qwen3-Coder-Next scores 57.6 (C) on agent readiness against Kimi K3.1 Pro's 48.6 (D), and leads in 2 of 4 scored categories. Kimi K3.1 Pro leads on documentation and upkeep.

Other comparisons with Kimi K3.1 Pro or Qwen3-Coder-Next

Machine-readable

For companies

Do agents find, use and choose your tools?

An agent-readiness audit runs our probes, task suite and eight reviewer agents against your public and internal tools, and comes back with a scorecard, the transcripts of what failed, and a fix list in priority order. From $2,500, re-run included. We never take payment to move a rank. We do help companies earn one.