Model comparison
Seed 2.0 Pro vs Gemini 2.5 Flash
Seed 2.0 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.5 to 39.0 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 18 shared benchmarks.
ByteDance Seed
GoogleSummary
- They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. Seed 2.0 Pro scores higher in 5 categories and Gemini 2.5 Flash in 4 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Seed 2.0 Pro leads 63.0 to 54.0.
- Gemini 2.5 Flash is cheaper at $0.30 / $2.50 per million input/output tokens, against $0.50 / $3 for Seed 2.0 Pro.
- Gemini 2.5 Flash accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 256K.
Side by side
| Seed 2.0 Pro | Gemini 2.5 Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | ByteDance Seed | |
| Noometry Index | 42.5 | 39.0 |
| Released | 2026-02-14 | 2025-04-17 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 256K | 1.05M |
| Max output | 128K | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.50 | $0.30 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $3 | $2.50 |
| Results tracked | 20 | 54 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Seed 2.0 Pro leads
Seed 2.0 Pro: 42.9 (#84), Gemini 2.5 Flash: 35.5 (#210)
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | Gemini 2.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1472 | 1424 |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | — | 28.7% |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 55.1% |
| WeirdML | — | 41.9% |
| ALE-Bench | — | 661.88 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Seed 2.0 Pro: —, Gemini 2.5 Flash: 30.6 (#67)
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | Gemini 2.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | — | 17.1% |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 56.2% |
| TheAgentCompany | — | 41.1% |
| BALROG | — | 33.5% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 548.84 |
Reasoning Seed 2.0 Pro leads
Seed 2.0 Pro: 23.1 (#167), Gemini 2.5 Flash: 18.2 (#271)
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | Gemini 2.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1453 | 1422 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 2.5% |
| SimpleBench | — | 41.2% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 56.8% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 28.4% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 33.3% |
| CritPt | — | 1.1% |
| EnigmaEval | — | 2.7% |
| Thematic Generalization | 57.1% | — |
| DTBench | — | 76.5% |
| LMCA | — | 27.5% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 143.04 |
| ForecastBench | — | 60.6 |
Math Gemini 2.5 Flash leads
Seed 2.0 Pro: 36.5 (#110), Gemini 2.5 Flash: 38.1 (#87)
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | Gemini 2.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1440 | 1415 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 73.1% |
| Omni-MATH | — | 38.5% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 4.8% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 4.2% |
Knowledge Seed 2.0 Pro leads
Seed 2.0 Pro: 39.6 (#119), Gemini 2.5 Flash: 36.1 (#162)
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | Gemini 2.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1440 | 1426 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | — | 12.1% |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 63.9% |
| Confabulations | — | 16.8% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 7.8% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 39% |
Multimodal Too close to call
Seed 2.0 Pro: 40.8 (#34), Gemini 2.5 Flash: 41.2 (#31)
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | Gemini 2.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1275 | 1254 |
| GeoBench | — | 76% |
| VPCT | — | 46.2% |
| SpatialViz-Bench | — | 36.9% |
Multilingual Seed 2.0 Pro leads
Seed 2.0 Pro: 54.8 (#37), Gemini 2.5 Flash: 52.5 (#83)
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | Gemini 2.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1442 | 1410 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1490 | 1450 |
| LMArena French | 1470 | 1433 |
| LMArena German | 1443 | 1419 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1408 | 1403 |
| LMArena Korean | 1412 | 1385 |
| LMArena Russian | 1450 | 1415 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1460 | 1421 |
Instruction Following Gemini 2.5 Flash leads
Seed 2.0 Pro: 74.7 (#86), Gemini 2.5 Flash: 75.9 (#50)
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | Gemini 2.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1414 | 1405 |
| IFEval | — | 89.8% |
Long Context Gemini 2.5 Flash leads
Seed 2.0 Pro: 43.6 (#85), Gemini 2.5 Flash: 47.5 (#16)
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | Gemini 2.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1428 | 1419 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 77.8% |
Writing & Preference Seed 2.0 Pro leads
Seed 2.0 Pro: 63.0 (#66), Gemini 2.5 Flash: 54.0 (#153)
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | Gemini 2.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1448 | 1417 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1406 | 1400 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1441 | 1408 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 76.5% |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1137 |
| WildBench | — | 81.7% |
Frequently asked questions
Is Seed 2.0 Pro better than Gemini 2.5 Flash?
Seed 2.0 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.5 to 39.0 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, Seed 2.0 Pro or Gemini 2.5 Flash?
Gemini 2.5 Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.30 per million input tokens and $2.50 per million output tokens; Seed 2.0 Pro lists at $0.50 and $3.
Is Seed 2.0 Pro or Gemini 2.5 Flash better for coding?
Seed 2.0 Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.9 versus 35.5 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Gemini 2.5 Flash does, with 1.05M tokens against 256K.
How many benchmarks do Seed 2.0 Pro and Gemini 2.5 Flash share?
18 benchmarks have published results for both models. Seed 2.0 Pro has 20 scored results on Noometry and Gemini 2.5 Flash has 54.