Model comparison
Seed 2.0 Pro vs Llama 2-70B
Seed 2.0 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.2 to 24.4 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.
ByteDance Seed
MetaSummary
- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Seed 2.0 Pro scores higher in 8 categories and Llama 2-70B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Seed 2.0 Pro leads 40.2 to 7.4.
- Llama 2-70B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Seed 2.0 Pro | Llama 2-70B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | ByteDance Seed | Meta |
| Noometry Index | 43.2 | 24.4 |
| Released | 2026-02-14 | 2023-07-18 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 256K | — |
| Max output | 128K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.50 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $3 | — |
| Results tracked | 20 | 35 |
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), Llama 2-70B: 31.4 (#286)
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | Llama 2-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1472 | 1079 |
Reasoning Seed 2.0 Pro leads
Seed 2.0 Pro: 24.1 (#165), Llama 2-70B: 14.4 (#325)
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | Llama 2-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1453 | 1073 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 28.4% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | 57.1% | — |
| DTBench | — | 41.6% |
| BIG-Bench Hard | — | 64.9% |
| CommonsenseQA 2.0 | — | 50% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 113.79 |
| ForecastBench | — | 51.4 |
| HellaSwag | — | 85.3% |
| LAMBADA | — | 78.9% |
| PIQA | — | 82.8% |
| WinoGrande | — | 80.2% |
Math Seed 2.0 Pro leads
Seed 2.0 Pro: 39.3 (#108), Llama 2-70B: 8.1 (#326)
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | Llama 2-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1439 | 1091 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 0% |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 3.3% |
| GSM8K | — | 69.6% |
Knowledge Seed 2.0 Pro leads
Seed 2.0 Pro: 40.2 (#122), Llama 2-70B: 7.4 (#310)
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | Llama 2-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1440 | 1039 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 26.3% |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 78.3% |
| BoolQ | — | 88.6% |
| MMLU | — | 69.9% |
| OpenBookQA | — | 60.2% |
| TriviaQA | — | 87.6% |
Multimodal Not comparable
Seed 2.0 Pro: 41.5 (#35), Llama 2-70B: —
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | Llama 2-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1274 | — |
Multilingual Seed 2.0 Pro leads
Seed 2.0 Pro: 54.5 (#39), Llama 2-70B: 27.7 (#274)
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | Llama 2-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1441 | 1045 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1489 | 995 |
| LMArena French | 1471 | 1090 |
| LMArena German | 1442 | 1041 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1408 | 927 |
| LMArena Korean | 1411 | 964 |
| LMArena Russian | 1449 | 1083 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1460 | 1143 |
Instruction Following Seed 2.0 Pro leads
Seed 2.0 Pro: 74.5 (#91), Llama 2-70B: 54.9 (#278)
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | Llama 2-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1414 | 1071 |
Long Context Seed 2.0 Pro leads
Seed 2.0 Pro: 43.6 (#90), Llama 2-70B: 32.3 (#270)
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | Llama 2-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1428 | 1062 |
Writing & Preference Seed 2.0 Pro leads
Seed 2.0 Pro: 62.9 (#69), Llama 2-70B: 32.3 (#279)
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | Llama 2-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1448 | 1115 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1406 | 1075 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1441 | 1088 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Seed 2.0 Pro better than Llama 2-70B?
Seed 2.0 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.2 to 24.4 on the Noometry Index.
Is Seed 2.0 Pro or Llama 2-70B better for coding?
Seed 2.0 Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 43.5 versus 31.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Seed 2.0 Pro and Llama 2-70B share?
17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Seed 2.0 Pro has 20 scored results on Noometry and Llama 2-70B has 35.