AD
Track all your projects in one dashboard. Get 📊stats, 🔥heatmaps and 👀recordings in one self-hosted dashboard.
uxwizz.com
#181

Seed-2.0-Code

Bytedance Seed Release: 2026-08-12 Tested on: 2026-10-01 04:09 bytedance-seed/seed-2.0-code::medium
~200B total (~20B active)MoEClosedEstimated
(high) (medium) (low) (none)

Summary

Seed-2.0-Code scores 7.4 on AI BENCHY and ranks #181. It has 8.0 reliability, a 65.2% pass rate, $1.275 total cost, and 100.65s average response time.

What makes Seed-2.0-Code unique: It stands out most in Coding, where it ranks #2, while Data parsing and extraction is its weakest area at #17.

Model facts

Researched on 2026-08-12

Estimated
Parameters
~200B total (~20B active)
Architecture
MoE
Availability
Closed
License
-

Best estimate from public evidence; the vendor did not disclose every value. ByteDance documents the API-only Code model, but does not disclose its architecture or parameter counts; estimate follows the Seed2 production tier.

Parameter source Availability source

Score

7.4

Consistency

7.4

Reliability

8.0

Total Cost (Current Price)

$1.275

Total Output Tokens

384,093

Total Input Tokens

244,499

Input Price

$0.500 / 1M

Output Price

$3.000 / 1M

Cache Read Price

N/A

Cache Write Price

N/A

Cache prices apply to input tokens. Reads reuse cached prompts; writes store them and can cost extra. Output tokens use the output price.

Tests Correct

Wrong Tests: 12

Attempt pass rate: 65.2%

Flaky tests

7

Flaky tests had mixed outcomes across runs (at least one pass and one fail).

Response Time (avg)

100.65s

Response Time (max): 626.58s

Response Time (total): 2314.88s

Wrong answer: 6 API error: 4 Extra formatting: 1 Did not follow instructions: 1

Hamster playing table tennis

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

#181 Seed-2.0-Code

medium
Cost
$0.026
Time
122.8s
Tokens
8,630 tok

Run history

Tested on Score Reliability Tests Correct Total Cost Compare
2026-10-01 04:09 Re-test 7.4 8.0 $1.275 Current run
2026-08-12 23:02 Initial run 6.9 4.7 $1.049 Compare

This run used a different benchmark suite. Keep suite changes in mind when reading historical movement.

Run comparison

RunBenchmark coverageScoreConsistencyReliabilityTests CorrectFlaky testsTotal Output TokensTotal Input TokensTotal CostResponse Time (avg)
2026-10-01 04:09 · Current run69/69 attempts7.47.48.011/237384,093244,499$1.275100.65s
2026-08-12 23:02 · Initial run66/66 attempts6.96.74.710/229336,69676,027$1.04993.60s
Difference—+0.5+0.7+3.3+1-2+47397+168472+$0.227+7044ms

Benchmark coverage differs: 69/69 attempts (Target: 3 repeats per test) versus 66/66 attempts (Target: 3 repeats per test). Totals and repeat-sensitive metrics are not directly comparable.

These two runs used different benchmark suites, so the deltas reflect both model changes and suite changes.

Charts

Choose the first model, then click a second model to open a side-by-side page.

Total Output Tokens

Score vs Total Output Tokens

Quick Compare

Seed-2.0-CodemediumvsDeepSeek V4 Flash 0731lowSeed-2.0-CodemediumvsGLM 5.3 FlashXhighSeed-2.0-CodemediumvsQwen3.6 FlashmediumSeed-2.0-CodemediumvsGrok 4.7lowSeed-2.0-CodemediumvsGPT-5.6 LunamediumSeed-2.0-CodemediumvsInkling SmallhighFree AvailableSeed-2.0-CodemediumvsSeed-2.0-CodehighSeed-2.0-CodemediumvsDeepSeek V4 Pro 0423noneSeed-2.0-CodemediumvsMistral Large 4highSeed-2.0-CodemediumvsInklingmediumFree Available

Category Breakdown

Category Score Consistency Tests Correct
Agentic 10.0 10.0
Anti-AI Tricks 6.9 9.5
Coding 8.9 7.8
Combined 4.7 1.6
Data parsing and extraction 7.3 8.9
Domain specific 5.3 7.2
General Intelligence 4.8 3.2
Instructions following 9.8 10.0
Puzzle Solving 8.2 7.2
Tool Calling 4.7 1.6
Trivia 3.0 10.0

Compared models