Model comparison
Seed 2.0 Pro vs GPT-6.1 Sol
GPT-6.1 Sol is the stronger model overall, scoring 65.6 to 43.2 on the Noometry Index. Seed 2.0 Pro costs 3.6× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-6.1 Sol's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 14 shared benchmarks.
ByteDance SeedSummary
- They share 14 benchmarks with published results for both. Seed 2.0 Pro scores higher in 1 category and GPT-6.1 Sol in 8 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where GPT-6.1 Sol leads 81.9 to 24.1.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is NYT Connections (extended): 28.4% for Seed 2.0 Pro and 95.5% for GPT-6.1 Sol.
- Seed 2.0 Pro is cheaper at $0.50 / $3 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $10 for GPT-6.1 Sol.
- GPT-6.1 Sol accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 256K.
Side by side
| Seed 2.0 Pro | GPT-6.1 Sol | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | ByteDance Seed | OpenAI |
| Noometry Index | 43.2 | 65.6 |
| Released | 2026-02-14 | 2026-09-29 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 256K | 1.05M |
| Max output | 128K | 128K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.50 | $2 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $3 | $10 |
| Results tracked | 20 | 34 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GPT-6.1 Sol leads
Seed 2.0 Pro: 43.5 (#86), GPT-6.1 Sol: 63.2 (#8)
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | GPT-6.1 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1472 | 1487 |
| DeepSWE | — | 75.2% |
| FrontierCode | — | 50.2% |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1755 |
| SciCode | — | 55.8% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Seed 2.0 Pro: —, GPT-6.1 Sol: 39.6 (#26)
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | GPT-6.1 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | — | 60% |
| GDP.pdf | — | 32% |
Reasoning GPT-6.1 Sol leads
Seed 2.0 Pro: 24.1 (#165), GPT-6.1 Sol: 81.9 (#2)
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | GPT-6.1 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | 28.4% | 95.5% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1453 | 1466 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 94.2% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 98.5% |
| CritPt | — | 31.7% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 61% |
| Thematic Generalization | 57.1% | — |
| EBR-Bench | — | 54.3% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 80% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 166.09 |
Math GPT-6.1 Sol leads
Seed 2.0 Pro: 39.3 (#108), GPT-6.1 Sol: 93.7 (#1)
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | GPT-6.1 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1439 | 1464 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 93.7% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 100% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 100% |
| ProofBench | — | 99% |
Knowledge GPT-6.1 Sol leads
Seed 2.0 Pro: 40.2 (#122), GPT-6.1 Sol: 71.8 (#4)
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | GPT-6.1 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1440 | 1502 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 95.4% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 73.9% |
Multimodal GPT-6.1 Sol leads
Seed 2.0 Pro: 41.5 (#35), GPT-6.1 Sol: 52.7 (#5)
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | GPT-6.1 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1274 | 1288 |
| Furniture Assembly | — | 80% |
Multilingual Too close to call
Seed 2.0 Pro: 54.5 (#39), GPT-6.1 Sol: 54.3 (#46)
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | GPT-6.1 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1441 | 1438 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1489 | 1477 |
| LMArena Russian | 1449 | 1455 |
| LMArena French | 1471 | — |
| LMArena German | 1442 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1408 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1411 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1460 | — |
Instruction Following GPT-6.1 Sol leads
Seed 2.0 Pro: 74.5 (#91), GPT-6.1 Sol: 77.0 (#29)
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | GPT-6.1 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1414 | 1468 |
Long Context GPT-6.1 Sol leads
Seed 2.0 Pro: 43.6 (#90), GPT-6.1 Sol: 44.9 (#54)
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | GPT-6.1 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1428 | 1465 |
Writing & Preference Too close to call
Seed 2.0 Pro: 62.9 (#69), GPT-6.1 Sol: 63.6 (#63)
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | GPT-6.1 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1448 | 1447 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1406 | 1432 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1441 | 1449 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Seed 2.0 Pro better than GPT-6.1 Sol?
GPT-6.1 Sol is the stronger model overall, scoring 65.6 to 43.2 on the Noometry Index. Seed 2.0 Pro costs 3.6× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-6.1 Sol's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Seed 2.0 Pro or GPT-6.1 Sol?
Seed 2.0 Pro is cheaper. It lists at $0.50 per million input tokens and $3 per million output tokens; GPT-6.1 Sol lists at $2 and $10.
Is Seed 2.0 Pro or GPT-6.1 Sol better for coding?
GPT-6.1 Sol scores higher on coding benchmarks: 63.2 versus 43.5 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
GPT-6.1 Sol does, with 1.05M tokens against 256K.
How many benchmarks do Seed 2.0 Pro and GPT-6.1 Sol share?
14 benchmarks have published results for both models. Seed 2.0 Pro has 20 scored results on Noometry and GPT-6.1 Sol has 34.