Advertise here
#290

Seed-2.0-Lite

Bytedance Seed Release: 2026-02-14 Tested on: 2026-10-01 02:42 bytedance-seed/seed-2.0-lite::none
~200B total (~20B active)MoEClosedEstimated
(medium) (none)

Summary

Seed-2.0-Lite scores 6.0 on AI BENCHY and ranks #290. It has 10.0 reliability, a 39.1% pass rate, $0.114 total cost, and 7.49s average response time.

What makes Seed-2.0-Lite unique: It stands out most in General Intelligence, where it ranks #1, while Anti-AI Tricks is its weakest area at #15.

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. Seed2 tiers are public, but their parameter counts are not.

Parameter source Availability source

Score

6.0

Consistency

8.9

Reliability

10.0

Total Cost (Current Price)

$0.114

Total Output Tokens

17,558

Total Input Tokens

314,113

Input Price

$0.250 / 1M

Output Price

$2.000 / 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: 15

Attempt pass rate: 39.1%

Flaky tests

3

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

Response Time (avg)

7.49s

Response Time (max): 75.99s

Response Time (total): 172.19s

Wrong answer: 14 No answer: 1

Hamster playing table tennis

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

#290 Seed-2.0-Lite

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

Run history

Tested on Score Reliability Tests Correct Total Cost Compare
2026-10-01 02:42 Re-test 6.0 10.0 $0.114 Current run
2026-07-16 23:10 New test added 6.2 10.0 $0.066 Compare
2026-06-04 14:17 New test added 5.8 10.0 $0.019 Compare
2026-05-22 00:33 Suite changed 5.9 10.0 $0.018 Compare
2026-04-11 01:44 First recorded run 6.2 N/A $0.016 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 02:42 · Current run69/69 attempts6.08.910.08/23317,558314,113$0.1147.49s
2026-04-11 01:44 · First recorded run54/54 attempts6.27.7N/A8/1853,1290$0.0162.53s
Difference—-0.2+1.20-2+14429+314113+$0.098+4961ms

Benchmark coverage differs: 69/69 attempts (Target: 3 repeats per test) versus 54/54 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-LitenonevsInkling SmallmediumFree AvailableSeed-2.0-LitenonevsGemini 3.1 Flash LiteminimalSeed-2.0-LitenonevsMiMo-V2.6-PrononeSeed-2.0-Litenonevsgpt-oss-120bmediumSeed-2.0-LitenonevsGLM 5.3 FlashXlowSeed-2.0-LitenonevsGemini 3.1 Flash LitenoneSeed-2.0-LitenonevsApodex 1.1 MinimediumFree AvailableSeed-2.0-LitenonevsQwen3.6 FlashnoneSeed-2.0-LitenonevsKAT-Coder-Pro V2.5defaultSeed-2.0-LitenonevsClaude Sonnet 5none

Category Breakdown

Category Score Consistency Tests Correct
Agentic 5.0 10.0
Anti-AI Tricks 3.0 5.9
Coding 5.6 10.0
Combined 3.0 10.0
Data parsing and extraction 10.0 10.0
Domain specific 3.0 10.0
General Intelligence 10.0 10.0
Instructions following 10.0 10.0
Puzzle Solving 5.3 7.2
Tool Calling 10.0 10.0
Trivia 3.0 10.0

Compared models