Model comparison
Seed 2.0 Pro vs Qwen3-4B
Seed 2.0 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.2 to 31.9 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
ByteDance Seed
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- The widest gap is in math, where Seed 2.0 Pro leads 39.3 to 29.7.
- Qwen3-4B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Seed 2.0 Pro | Qwen3-4B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | ByteDance Seed | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 43.2 | 31.9 |
| Released | 2026-02-14 | 2025-04-29 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 256K | — |
| Max output | 128K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.50 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $3 | — |
| Results tracked | 20 | 6 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
Seed 2.0 Pro: 43.5 (#86), Qwen3-4B: —
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | Qwen3-4B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1472 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Seed 2.0 Pro: —, Qwen3-4B: 27.6 (#100)
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | Qwen3-4B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 35.7% |
Reasoning Seed 2.0 Pro leads
Seed 2.0 Pro: 24.1 (#165), Qwen3-4B: 19.2 (#268)
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | Qwen3-4B |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | 28.4% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 4% |
| Thematic Generalization | 57.1% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1453 | — |
Math Seed 2.0 Pro leads
Seed 2.0 Pro: 39.3 (#108), Qwen3-4B: 29.7 (#240)
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | Qwen3-4B |
|---|---|---|
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | — | 38.5% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 52.2% |
| LMArena Math | 1439 | — |
Knowledge Seed 2.0 Pro leads
Seed 2.0 Pro: 40.2 (#122), Qwen3-4B: 33.0 (#208)
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | Qwen3-4B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 52.3% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 5.7% |
| LMArena Expert | 1440 | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Seed 2.0 Pro: 41.5 (#35), Qwen3-4B: —
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | Qwen3-4B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1274 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Seed 2.0 Pro: 54.5 (#39), Qwen3-4B: —
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | Qwen3-4B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1441 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1489 | — |
| LMArena French | 1471 | — |
| LMArena German | 1442 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1408 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1411 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1449 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1460 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Seed 2.0 Pro: 74.5 (#91), Qwen3-4B: —
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | Qwen3-4B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1414 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Seed 2.0 Pro: 43.6 (#90), Qwen3-4B: —
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | Qwen3-4B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1428 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Seed 2.0 Pro: 62.9 (#69), Qwen3-4B: —
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | Qwen3-4B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1448 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1406 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1441 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Seed 2.0 Pro better than Qwen3-4B?
Seed 2.0 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.2 to 31.9 on the Noometry Index.
How many benchmarks do Seed 2.0 Pro and Qwen3-4B share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Seed 2.0 Pro has 20 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3-4B has 6.