Navigate
AI BENCHY
AD
Track all your projects in one dashboard. Get 📊stats, 🔥heatmaps and 👀recordings in one self-hosted dashboard.
uxwizz.com

AI BENCHY Compare

ByteDance Seed: Seed-2.0-Lite vs Qwen: Qwen3.5-35B-A3B

Summary

Seed-2.0-Lite leads on average score with 6.2 vs 5.9. Qwen3.5-35B-A3B has the lower benchmark cost at $0.012 vs $0.019. Seed-2.0-Lite is faster at 2.49s vs 3.37s, with pass rates of 46.0% vs 42.9%.

Recommended modelSeed-2.0-LiteIt has the strongest score in this comparison (6.2) and the best overall balance of cost and response time across all 2 models.

Last updated at: 2026-07-14

Metric Seed-2.0-Lite Seed-2.0-Lite none Release: 2026-02-14 Qwen3.5-35B-A3B Qwen3.5-35B-A3B none Release: 2026-02-24
Score 6.2 5.9
Rank #112 #127
Reliability 10.0 10.0
Consistency 8.4 8.9
Tests Correct
Attempt pass rate 46.0% 42.9%
Flaky tests 4 3
Total Runs 63 63
Cost per result 0.228 0.230
Total Cost $0.019 $0.012
Input Price $0.250 / 1M $0.140 / 1M
Output Price $2.000 / 1M $1.000 / 1M
Total Input Tokens 46,573 48,194
Output Tokens 3,259 4,343
Reasoning Tokens 0 0
Response Time (avg) 2.49s 3.37s
Response Time (max) 6.70s 47.43s
Response Time (total) 52.26s 70.75s

Generation showcase

Hamster playing table tennis

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

#112 Seed-2.0-Lite

none
Cost
$0.005
Time
83.8s
Tokens
2,311 tok

#127 Qwen3.5-35B-A3B

none
Cost
$0.005
Time
28.4s
Tokens
4,518 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-Lite 5.6 10.0 33.3% 0 2.83s 8,215 410 0
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B 5.5 10.0 33.3% 0 1.39s 7,808 571 0

Quick Compare

Switch Comparison Pair