Navigate
Advertise here

Seed-2.0-Code vs Qwen3.6 35B A3B

The average score is effectively tied at 5.3 vs 5.3. Qwen3.6 35B A3B has the lower benchmark cost at $0.061 vs $0.151. Qwen3.6 35B A3B is faster at 5.57s vs 14.67s, with pass rates of 36.4% vs 28.8%.

Last updated at: 2026-09-24

Compared models

Rank
#288
Total Output Tokens
23,433
Response Time (avg)
14.67s
Total Cost
$0.151
Rank
#291
Total Output Tokens
45,905
Response Time (avg)
5.57s
Total Cost
$0.061
Recommended model Qwen3.6 35B A3B

It has the best score here (5.3), while costing about 2.5x less than Seed-2.0-Code.

Detailed comparison

Metric Seed-2.0-Code Seed-2.0-Code none Release: 2026-08-12 Qwen3.6 35B A3B Qwen3.6 35B A3B none Release: 2026-04-20
Score 5.3 5.3
Rank #288 #291
Reliability 8.6 10.0
Consistency 8.1 8.1
Attempts 66/66 66/66
Tests Correct
Attempt pass rate 36.4% 28.8%
Flaky tests 5 5
Total Runs 66 66
Cost per result 2.503 1.470
Total Cost $0.151 $0.061
Input Price $0.500 / 1M $0.150 / 1M
Output Price $3.000 / 1M $1.000 / 1M
Total Input Tokens 159,749 93,990
Output Tokens 23,433 45,905
Reasoning Tokens 0 0
Response Time (avg) 14.67s 5.57s
Response Time (max) 132.84s 39.54s
Response Time (total) 322.71s 111.32s
Parameters ~200B total (~20B active) 35B total (3B active)
Availability Closed Open source

Model generation showcase

Hamster playing table tennis

Prompt: Create a detailed SVG illustration of a hamster playing table tennis.

#288 Seed-2.0-Code

none
Cost
$0.030
Time
140.6s
Tokens
9,924 tok

#291 Qwen3.6 35B A3B

none
Cost
$0.008
Time
30.1s
Tokens
6,317 tok

Top Models by Score

Score vs Total Cost

Response Time (avg)

Score vs Response Time (avg)

Total Output Tokens

Score vs Total Output Tokens

Category Breakdown

Coding Score Consistency Attempt pass rate Flaky tests Tests Correct Response Time (avg) Input Tokens Output Tokens Reasoning Tokens
Seed-2.0-Code 3.6 9.8 0.0% 0 13.42s 7,230 505 0
Qwen3.6 35B A3B 5.5 10.0 33.3% 0 8.77s 7,911 11,161 0

Quick Compare

Switch Comparison Pair