Navigate
AI BENCHY
Advertise here

ByteDance Seed: Seed-2.0-Lite vs Qwen: Qwen3.5-Flash

The average score is effectively tied at 6.2 vs 6.2. Seed-2.0-Lite has the lower benchmark cost at $0.066 vs $0.139. Seed-2.0-Lite is faster at 4.40s vs 84.82s, with pass rates of 43.9% vs 69.7%.

Recommended modelSeed-2.0-LiteIt has the best score here (6.2), while costing about 2.1x less than Qwen3.5-Flash (medium).

Last updated at: 2026-07-17

Metric Seed-2.0-Lite Seed-2.0-Lite none Release: 2026-02-14 Qwen3.5-Flash Qwen3.5-Flash medium Release: 2026-02-24
Score 6.2 6.2
Rank #110 #108
Reliability 10.0 10.0
Consistency 8.5 7.8
Tests Correct
Attempt pass rate 43.9% 69.7%
Flaky tests 4 6
Total Runs 66 66
Cost per result 0.814 1.361
Total Cost $0.066 $0.139
Input Price $0.250 / 1M $0.065 / 1M
Output Price $2.000 / 1M $0.260 / 1M
Total Input Tokens 142,197 118,499
Output Tokens 14,746 12,284
Reasoning Tokens 0 490,610
Response Time (avg) 4.40s 84.82s
Response Time (max) 44.58s 515.38s
Response Time (total) 96.84s 1781.22s

Hamster playing table tennis

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

#110 Seed-2.0-Lite

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

#108 Qwen3.5-Flash

medium
Cost
$0.002
Time
25.8s
Tokens
4,294 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-Flash 3.7 7.2 22.2% 1 58.87s 6,685 302 90,081

Quick Compare

Switch Comparison Pair