Seed 2.0 is the stronger all-rounder.
Scores updated · 6 tests both models report · How we compare
Where each one wins
Tests won in each of the four areas where both have results. Each piece is one test, so a longer bar means more evidence; grey means the two scored within a point of each other.
Agents, reasoning and math rest on a single test each.
What it costs
Prices per million tokens, roughly 750,000 words. The bars show the cost of a million tokens read plus a million written.
Seed 2.0 costs 51% less for the same work.
The biggest differences
The tests each model wins by the widest margin, up to three each. Scores are out of 100.
Where Seed 2.0 pulls ahead
- Finds hard-to-locate facts by browsing the webBrowseComp+23.4points ahead
- Graduate-level biology, physics and chemistry questionsGPQA Diamond+2.8points ahead
- Recent programming contest problemsLiveCodeBench v6+1.9points ahead
Where Qwen3 Max (Reasoning) pulls ahead
No clear win on a test scored out of 100.
Every test, side by side
All 6 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
CodingSeed 2.0
- LiveCodeBench v6Seed 2.0 by 1.985.987.8+1.9
- SWE-bench VerifiedSeed 2.0 by 1.275.376.5+1.2
Other results1 test, not counted
Tests outside the eight areas. They are not counted above: several are summary scores built from other tests, or the same test under another name.
- AIME 2025Seed 2.0 by 16.781.698.3+16.7
Questions people ask
Which is better, Qwen3 Max (Reasoning) or Seed 2.0?
Seed 2.0 wins three of the four areas where both have results: coding, agents and reasoning. Qwen3 Max (Reasoning) wins none. They are level on math.
Which is better for coding?
Seed 2.0. It wins 2 of the 2 coding tests both models report; Qwen3 Max (Reasoning) wins none.
Which is cheaper?
Qwen3 Max (Reasoning) costs $1.20 per million input tokens and $6.00 per million output tokens; Seed 2.0 costs $0.50 and $3.00. That makes Seed 2.0 about 51% cheaper for the same work.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 6 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 5 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 1 are listed but not counted, because several are summary scores or repeat a test. Each score is the one shown on the model's own page.