Model comparison
Seed 2.0 Pro vs GPT-4.1
Seed 2.0 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.2 to 35.9 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 18 shared benchmarks.
ByteDance SeedSummary
- They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. Seed 2.0 Pro scores higher in 9 categories and GPT-4.1 in 0 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Seed 2.0 Pro leads 39.3 to 22.3.
- Seed 2.0 Pro is cheaper at $0.50 / $3 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $8 for GPT-4.1.
- GPT-4.1 accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 256K.
Side by side
| Seed 2.0 Pro | GPT-4.1 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | ByteDance Seed | OpenAI |
| Noometry Index | 43.2 | 35.9 |
| Released | 2026-02-14 | 2025-04-14 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 256K | 1.05M |
| Max output | 128K | 33K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.50 | $2 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $3 | $8 |
| Results tracked | 20 | 52 |
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: 43.5 (#86), GPT-4.1: 34.4 (#238)
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | GPT-4.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1472 | 1391 |
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 48.5% |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | — | 39.6% |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 52.4% |
| WeirdML | — | 39% |
| CadEval | — | 42% |
| ALE-Bench | — | 558.1 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Seed 2.0 Pro: —, GPT-4.1: 34.7 (#43)
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | GPT-4.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 54% |
Reasoning Seed 2.0 Pro leads
Seed 2.0 Pro: 24.1 (#165), GPT-4.1: 11.7 (#339)
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | GPT-4.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1453 | 1384 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 0.4% |
| SimpleBench | — | 27% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 52.3% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 28.4% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 5.5% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 6% |
| EnigmaEval | — | 2.2% |
| Thematic Generalization | 57.1% | — |
| DTBench | — | 68.3% |
| LMCA | — | 25.6% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 136.78 |
| ForecastBench | — | 61.5 |
Math Seed 2.0 Pro leads
Seed 2.0 Pro: 39.3 (#108), GPT-4.1: 22.3 (#280)
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | GPT-4.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1439 | 1370 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 6% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 38.3% |
| Omni-MATH | — | 47.1% |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 83% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 5.5% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 0% |
Knowledge Seed 2.0 Pro leads
Seed 2.0 Pro: 40.2 (#122), GPT-4.1: 37.1 (#160)
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | GPT-4.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1440 | 1364 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 66.9% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | — | 5.4% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 31.1% |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 81.1% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 5.6% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 65.9% |
Multimodal Seed 2.0 Pro leads
Seed 2.0 Pro: 41.5 (#35), GPT-4.1: 38.2 (#67)
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | GPT-4.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1274 | 1211 |
| GeoBench | — | 72% |
Multilingual Seed 2.0 Pro leads
Seed 2.0 Pro: 54.5 (#39), GPT-4.1: 49.4 (#133)
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | GPT-4.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1441 | 1370 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1489 | 1382 |
| LMArena French | 1471 | 1382 |
| LMArena German | 1442 | 1381 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1408 | 1319 |
| LMArena Korean | 1411 | 1339 |
| LMArena Russian | 1449 | 1377 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1460 | 1376 |
Instruction Following Seed 2.0 Pro leads
Seed 2.0 Pro: 74.5 (#91), GPT-4.1: 71.3 (#153)
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | GPT-4.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1414 | 1367 |
| IFEval | — | 83.8% |
Long Context Seed 2.0 Pro leads
Seed 2.0 Pro: 43.6 (#90), GPT-4.1: 40.0 (#163)
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | GPT-4.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1428 | 1385 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 63.9% |
Writing & Preference Seed 2.0 Pro leads
Seed 2.0 Pro: 62.9 (#69), GPT-4.1: 57.6 (#125)
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | GPT-4.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1448 | 1383 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1406 | 1363 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1441 | 1398 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1420 |
| WildBench | — | 85.4% |
Frequently asked questions
Is Seed 2.0 Pro better than GPT-4.1?
Seed 2.0 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.2 to 35.9 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, Seed 2.0 Pro or GPT-4.1?
Seed 2.0 Pro is cheaper. It lists at $0.50 per million input tokens and $3 per million output tokens; GPT-4.1 lists at $2 and $8.
Is Seed 2.0 Pro or GPT-4.1 better for coding?
Seed 2.0 Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 43.5 versus 34.4 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
GPT-4.1 does, with 1.05M tokens against 256K.
How many benchmarks do Seed 2.0 Pro and GPT-4.1 share?
18 benchmarks have published results for both models. Seed 2.0 Pro has 20 scored results on Noometry and GPT-4.1 has 52.