Model comparison
Seed 2.0 Pro vs GPT-4o mini
Seed 2.0 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.2 to 25.5 on the Noometry Index. GPT-4o mini costs 4.3× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Seed 2.0 Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
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-4o mini 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 10.4.
- GPT-4o mini is cheaper at $0.15 / $0.60 per million input/output tokens, against $0.50 / $3 for Seed 2.0 Pro.
- Seed 2.0 Pro accepts more context: 256K tokens versus 128K.
Side by side
| Seed 2.0 Pro | GPT-4o mini | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | ByteDance Seed | OpenAI |
| Noometry Index | 43.2 | 25.5 |
| Released | 2026-02-14 | 2024-07-18 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 256K | 128K |
| Max output | 128K | 16K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.50 | $0.15 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $3 | $0.60 |
| Results tracked | 20 | 60 |
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-4o mini: 22.0 (#335)
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | GPT-4o mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1472 | 1290 |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 3.6% |
| WeirdML | — | 11.8% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 46.1% |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 43.1% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 57.4% |
| HumanEval+ | — | 83.5% |
| MBPP+ | — | 72.2% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Seed 2.0 Pro: —, GPT-4o mini: 27.5 (#101)
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | GPT-4o mini |
|---|---|---|
| BALROG | — | 17.4% |
Reasoning Seed 2.0 Pro leads
Seed 2.0 Pro: 24.1 (#165), GPT-4o mini: 8.7 (#347)
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | GPT-4o mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1453 | 1267 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 0% |
| SimpleBench | — | 10.7% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 28.8% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 28.4% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 0% |
| Thematic Generalization | 57.1% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 32.8% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 12% |
| DTBench | — | 54.4% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 50% |
| LMCA | — | 10.4% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 126.56 |
| LiveBench | — | 41.3% |
| PIQA | — | 88.7% |
Math Seed 2.0 Pro leads
Seed 2.0 Pro: 39.3 (#108), GPT-4o mini: 10.4 (#314)
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | GPT-4o mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1439 | 1267 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 0.7% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 6.9% |
| Omni-MATH | — | 28% |
| LiveBench Math | — | 36.3% |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 52.6% |
| GSM8K | — | 91.3% |
Knowledge Seed 2.0 Pro leads
Seed 2.0 Pro: 40.2 (#122), GPT-4o mini: 17.7 (#284)
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | GPT-4o mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1440 | 1235 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 37.7% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 8.3% |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 60.3% |
| Confabulations | — | 37.2% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 36.8% |
| BoolQ | — | 88.7% |
| MMLU | — | 81.8% |
Multimodal Seed 2.0 Pro leads
Seed 2.0 Pro: 41.5 (#35), GPT-4o mini: 25.9 (#122)
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | GPT-4o mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1274 | 1066 |
| Video-MME | — | 64.8% |
| GeoBench | — | 64% |
| VPCT | — | 34% |
Multilingual Seed 2.0 Pro leads
Seed 2.0 Pro: 54.5 (#39), GPT-4o mini: 42.0 (#199)
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | GPT-4o mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1441 | 1266 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1489 | 1265 |
| LMArena French | 1471 | 1297 |
| LMArena German | 1442 | 1272 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1408 | 1216 |
| LMArena Korean | 1411 | 1195 |
| LMArena Russian | 1449 | 1275 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1460 | 1276 |
Instruction Following Seed 2.0 Pro leads
Seed 2.0 Pro: 74.5 (#91), GPT-4o mini: 61.9 (#239)
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | GPT-4o mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1414 | 1258 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 56.8% |
| IFEval | — | 78.2% |
Long Context Seed 2.0 Pro leads
Seed 2.0 Pro: 43.6 (#90), GPT-4o mini: 39.1 (#186)
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | GPT-4o mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1428 | 1289 |
Writing & Preference Seed 2.0 Pro leads
Seed 2.0 Pro: 62.9 (#69), GPT-4o mini: 39.5 (#248)
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | GPT-4o mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1448 | 1286 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1406 | 1268 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1441 | 1285 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 67.2% |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 873 |
| WildBench | — | 79.1% |
| LiveBench Language | — | 28.6% |
Frequently asked questions
Is Seed 2.0 Pro better than GPT-4o mini?
Seed 2.0 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.2 to 25.5 on the Noometry Index. GPT-4o mini costs 4.3× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Seed 2.0 Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Seed 2.0 Pro or GPT-4o mini?
GPT-4o mini is cheaper. It lists at $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.60 per million output tokens; Seed 2.0 Pro lists at $0.50 and $3.
Is Seed 2.0 Pro or GPT-4o mini better for coding?
Seed 2.0 Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 43.5 versus 22.0 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Seed 2.0 Pro does, with 256K tokens against 128K.
How many benchmarks do Seed 2.0 Pro and GPT-4o mini share?
18 benchmarks have published results for both models. Seed 2.0 Pro has 20 scored results on Noometry and GPT-4o mini has 60.